
1 t it 






° ^ > * 

C' y <■ o • {£* i 


v' 


y* ^VlWVCs^ > \ 

C^y * CL' 

o «y a civ 

0N0 V s '■"> '"’• ■* 

*. v .*♦ *wa •%. %* *vate»'. ■’*<*, .♦ v 

\ r/ w^ * «** % -* ^ <$> c t//®# * c> <<. - 

^ * * S S A \ A . V 1 * „ % y 0 * * * A 0 0 N c *<**** V s ' \\ 

0° * c ♦. *+ .# 



>• '>0 Jk V 

t - *J- K 

; <i 1 * 


x 0 °<. 


“ w /. 

5N ! ' A, *’ ^ A 

it: % c \ $ 


A 

X' mTAlf/^xA-% v. 

.>. c k < 

„ ° o * ^ 

. ^>° «5 *** - ^ 

<*V. *- > 7r '*^ ■v - ' A C- ✓ <, X <P * k A<< ‘’^ ^ 

, -., '> ./, s :; 'Ac *- Z,-.,^ ./,„. 

v , z z . WN * - . ? ° ^ ** «* f 

, J: **% *’ /% lH?/ ^\ •%*-* 

'' r ^>V-.. v' v!< • - ° * a "' v'..-. V-' c 

fy A A _ I I __ 

_ y -Mv»- <r O • A- ^ / t /i/ v ^ 

>'' , ',\' ,1 ‘ t ’,^ ,.„ % ''"'/k..,'^ * a ~ o ’ / 

'/ V «- x °/ < ^ ,0 *, s ^ O v V OL ^ * 0 * 

^ ^ \ % /• 

'ip ° ^ v ° 

*> vAV ° M/ \KT 

‘ V '>* ^ I- "< v, __ 

**- * ^ ^ * ■* ■* V y 

.o < ** I t S 

VV ' <v * s 



L°°.. 



o * v. 


A v - ■» 

ssw', A *'^nL\ c -* c°- . £ 

^Mm’° oo 'MPT' 0 * 

A> *-7^.% o° ^ a" ^ . 

, ^ * 0 N 0 ■ ^ 

• ~ V> A* 0 / > 


yy. ct 

^ s 

A* s 

<- ^ A 1 *">’ r ' ^ <A ^ - 

, _ v • v vo-;’/ ^ vxB** A A 

' 5 * ^ - 1 * * ;v° * ‘ »»«. • •. v ; *" 

++ ^ *-, 





v 

o 0 X 


t -,; W^ 

\0 c> * j ^ 

■ ^ z \3^ ° ^ •%. ^ 

°-U * a N *> ' Jr ‘ * 77' a V '0 c> 

\^ X « K A 0 . A 8 1 ' A c » O , 

v ^ vA-JW V C k 




O . \V xP 

J -V ^ 


\° °c. -, 

r\ ^ 

* 0^° s'•*'%>"* 0 N °’* A 

, v V'“ 

r- >/> A' ^ 

<P 


0 * k * A' r , A / s A N < \ 

QV c° N G -P ** a\ ,ll|, 

0 * K ^ A A X V 

+ ->0. a \ 

' ti- V^ 



V 

o 0 X 


<p ^ 

* C ^>> 

-. « A V '• 

r> O »s e> -A fl V 

^ y °* Jy u <■ 

% °° o°' a_!^ n ° % ^ 4 

^ * > 

T^VI 'v ® ^ ^ V ^ 

A <»- A 'ey. ■ «*. r *? ^ ' v 

A ^ 

; • 






'Kr, J 
S s 


' tt it 


\Y </> 

A v. 

'A y .>*. ., 

*“ -s 4 *s 

S s A O. ' n » 


S % " V N »a.„, "> *..'* 0 f U , 

'*, % .# .VVa*". ^ A' *% 

* -Sj. - !SH=/ O ,A V tn o \ 


* «,' 

-A \L V 

^ ' /v 


r K. w . 













r ' 'Kc cf 

7 \ 7 7 /, 

° 4 ^ % ° ^ 


*r w \'> a o- 

C <s 




<✓> 

✓» * 

<£* 'in 1 4 ^ -0 ^ . O’ <j ^ 0 ^ l*^ ^ 

% ' ‘ ' <& s' * * '+ ^ V V » ’ * »/■ > 

A ^ *^fe' , » ^>V 


, o N c * A v . 

£v) ^ * 

fj* I- ' 1 \ (y 75 y 

% *'" 9*V' 'A ’" V> ■’••. 

% e-, A ^ A V .’■■aV-*- 

? O A> </> o 6 y|fM " c5> ^ > '^fllpS'' O A \V '«/> w Of/ «» Ur * <■ 

\ ^ <iy ^ j v <^' * CcifS * ^ ^ ^ <0 

> - ‘ ^ r, L '^ r> < '0*0 \ V 'V A r 

V. ■» * * s A » \ t B » K~, r\V C 


° z v 


^III^ A° J % * * z ^ * 3 N 

0^ . s C‘ 

<v. 




<■ o 

^ v >, 

' * ^ * 0 z ^ 

r r^» . ^ n /I r> .i» 

* aV ^«CA 0 % e,V 

£ ^ : _ 

* / .«‘A''”''V' .v./V”’ 1 

*> * 1 . Wl/AsyZ^-. . y V 

/^i r\» 


^ ^\Vvvr a 

O y N *Y5 J * O > < 

s ., /%. * » «»’ . o, 

s s _ ^ C‘ V ^ ^. 

v ^v<X_ <■ ^ T 

■ "v^ p ^\ /n. 




&»; o 



0 N 0 


^ *■ <(p o H 

*111 J v s o*> /- 

<v ' * *t c> 

<■ J ^ z -f->. 

% ,# 






<<s*' ,f u 



>%. 1 




> \^ <#• 
y ^ a /i f> .i^ «>r 

^ ^ ^ a 0 ^ - 

z 









































‘ScjC-av ^ A 


\ 


csn \GOuCXi <; 


The Nations cannot* or at least will not* disarm until there 
shall have been established a Supreme Court of International 
Justice endowed with authority to determine ALL interna¬ 
tional controversies and with power to enforce its decrees. 
This means that out of the Hague Tribunal shall come a true 
Peace Federation of the Nations. 




/ 


(Hhr Stetoration of tl|? Ulorlii 


“God governs the world; the actual working of His government—the carrying out 
of His plan—is the history of the world.” 

—Hegel: “Philosophy of History,” p. 36. 

“Were half the power that fills the world with error. 

Were half the wealth bestowed on camps and courts. 

Given to redeem the human mind from error, 

There were no need of arsenals or forts.” 

— Longfellow. 


PUBLISHED AT NEW YORK. 1910 
-BY— 

THE WORLD-FEDERATION LEAGUE 

A Department of the New York Peace Society 
507 Fifth Avenue 

TheJohnson Press 
New York 



> ) > 






Dedicated 

to 

Andrew Carnegie 


Whose enduring monument will be the Temple of Peace at The Hague. 
History will record his name for his work in the 
cause of Universal Peace. 


&¥ «&»**** 

JAN 14 1913 



t ■ 






t • 


CONTENTS 

The World-Federation League.. 1 

Introduction . 4 

The Federation of the World: Walter John Bartnett . 7 

Editorial Comment in “The Arena”. 22 

Andrew Carnegie on the Peace Movement. 23 

International School of Peace: Edwin Ginn . 29 

Letter from President Taft. 38 

Theodore Roosevelt and the Peace Movement: W. J. Bartnett.... 39 

A Suggestion from Willian T. Stead. 42 

A League of Peace: Andrew Carnegie ... 42 

A Christmas Plea for Perpetual and Universal Peace: 

John Temple Graves . 44 

Who Shall Lead the World to the World’s Desire? 

John Temple Graves . 48 

Articles of Federation for the Federated States of the World: 

Oscar T. Crosby . 50 

A Constitution of the World: .,. 59 

Roosevelt—A Suggestion: Henry G. Granger . 61 

The Task of Mr. Roosevelt: The Independent . 66 

Permanent Peace the World’s Need: Henry G. Granger . 68 

The Proposed High Court of Nations: James L. Tryon . 71 

Paraphrase of Secretary Knox’s Circular to the Powers. 81 

Knox for Arbitral Court: N. Y. Times . 84 

An Arbitral Tribunal: San Francisco Chronicle . 86 

Reply of France to the Knox Proposal: N. Y. Evening Post . 88 

The Peace Movement: W. J. Bartnett . 89 

Cost of “Armed Peace’ to the Nations of the World: 

Representative Tawney in N. Y. Times . 93 

It is Time to Protest: Boston Herald . 99 

Halting Naval Extravagance: N. Y. World . 102 

One-Tenth of One Per Cent, for Peace: N. Y. Times . 103 

America Now Has Opportunity-to Lead the World to Peace 

or War: John Temple. Graves . 104 

Madness of Aerial Warfare-: Thomas J. Vivian . 107 

Comparisons: Education ’and War-Prepara'tion : Christian 

Science Sentinel .109 

Words of President Taft: John Temple Graves .•.Ill 

President Taft on National Honor. 113 

Words of Cardinal Gibbons... 114 

Hon. John W. Foster.114 

Senator Burton.114 

“ Dr. Benj. Ide Wheeler. 115 

“ Dr. R. S. MacArthur. 116 

“ Hon. Richard Bartholdt. 117 

“ Hon. Chas. W. Fairbanks. 117 

King Edward. 118 

Practical Steps to Secure International Peace: J4 . J. Bartnett.... 119 

Statue of Universal Peace—A Suggestion.122 

Position of the Christian Worker for Peace: W. Evans Darby .... 124 

The Voice of Religion... 126 

Universal Peace (poem) : Harriet Bartnett . 128 


































































. 

^ : • 

' 






V 

. . 


. ... '■ 

m‘ fSj 1 '! •- • t 

. 

. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

• ■; . n v .; •! 

■ • *; • . a 
























. *y - 

.. 


4 • . » ... « * 

.. » 'A : ' 




N 








Horlii-lfaforatimt league 

The World-Federation League declares its object in its 
name, but the declaration requires limitation. 

It is not the intent of this organization to urge changes 
in the existing forms of national governments or the forma¬ 
tion of one government which should attempt to regulate the 
domestic affairs of all lands. The contemplated Federation 
of the Nations is designed only to lessen the occasions of war 
and to diminish the constantly increasing burdens on all states 
of maintaining armies and navies beyond those required for 
the necessary internal policing of the several nations. 

Other societies having as their general object the pro¬ 
motion of international peace, were in existence when a small 
number of men associated themselves in the League for the 
more efficient direction of their interest and energy toward 
the cause in question. 

A reason for the existence of several societies having a 
common object, is found in the fact that different minds figure 
to themselves the desired state of peace among nations as 
fixed in different particular forms of a central government; 
and they propose to themselves different particular efforts as 
suitable for hastening the day of establishment of some form 
of central government, empowered to keep the peace. 

From the nature of the case, it may be assumed that these 
various efforts will not conflict with each other, but, on the 
contrary, will co-operate as parallel forces urging men and 
nations toward a future practical brotherhood. 

Therefore the League feels no hesitation in addressing 
itself to all men, soliciting their consideration of certain 
specific steps which, it is believed, may now be beneficially 
taken by the Government of the United States, and which are 
indicated in the following Joint Resolution of Congress, which 
has been introduced in the House by Hon. Richard Bartholdt. 


Proposed joint Resolution of the Congress of the 
United States of America 

WHEREAS modern means of communication now afford 
to the people of all nations a better understanding of their 
common interests than the people heretofore and 

WHEREAS such mutual understanding and its resultant 
sympathy between the people of all countries provide the 
moral basis for a citizenship of the world; and 

Whereas this universal citizenship requires an organ of 
expression and of action to the end that it may bear proper 
fruit in diminishing the desolations of war and in promoting 
human happiness through peaceful co-operation of states; 

And Whereas it is deemed advisable that the Govern¬ 
ment of the United States give public expression to a 
form of articles of International Federation which, in sub¬ 
stance, may be recommended to other Governments as a fit¬ 
ting instrument for realizing world-wide aspirations toward 
the amelioration of harsh conditions now suffered by multi¬ 
tudes, and which, in part, are due to an ever-present fear of 
international war; 

Now Therefore, Be It Resolved, by the Senate 
and House of Representatives of the United States of 
America in Congress assembled, that a commission of five 
members be appointed by the President of the United States; 
the duties of such commission to be as follows: — 

FIRST: To urge upon the attention of other Govern¬ 
ments the fact that relief from the heavy burden of military 
expenditures and from the disasters of war can best be ob¬ 
tained by the establishment of an International Federation; 

SECONDLY : To report to Congress, as soon as prac¬ 
ticable, a draft of articles of a Federation limited to the 
maintenance of peace, through the establishment of an inter¬ 
national Court having power to determine by decree all con¬ 
troversies between nations and to enforce execution of its de¬ 
crees by the arms of the Federation, such arms to be provided 
to the Federation and controlled solely by it. 

2 



THIRDLY: To consider and report upon any other 
means to diminish the expenses of Government for military 
purposes and to lessen the probabilities of war. 

The above Resolution, if passed, will engage the people 
of the American Union in an official, frank and energetic 
effort directed to the establishment of a central authority duly 
endowed with power to diminish the burden of war-prep¬ 
aration and the probability of war-execution throughout the 
world. 

This may possibly be effected by increasing the powers 
of the Hague Conference and the Hague Court, making 
of the Hague Conference a true parliamentary body, with 
powers of limited legislation, and of the Hague Court 
a true international tribunal with power, as mentioned above, 
to settle all controversies between nations. This implies the 
control by the said court of an armed force to execute its 
decrees. 

The work of determining exactly what endowment of 
power is necessary and practicable, lies just beyond the ac¬ 
complishment of such specific official action as is contained 
in the proposals above outlined. They are believed to be 
practicaly concrete beginnings . 

Should President Taft appoint a Peace Commission 
composed of, say, Theodore Roosevelt, Andrew Carnegie, 
Elihu Root, Joseph H. Choate and Richard Bartholdt, can 
anyone doubt that great results would be obtained? 

If you approve the objects of the League, will you not 
kindly communicate your approval to the Secretary? Will 
you not write your views at length to the Secretary? Your 
suggestions may aid the League in the work it has under¬ 
taken. 

Will you not write to the Senators and Representatives 
of your State, urging their furtherance of the proposals 
mentioned ? 

F. MILTON WILLIS, Secretary, 

Care of NEW YORK PEACE SOCIETY 
507 Fifth Avenue, NEW YORK 


Introduction 


This pamphlet is issued to present succinctly some of the 
more recent facts and opinions relating to the Peace Move¬ 
ment, it being understood that the League is responsible for 
the utterances on pp. i, 2 and 3, and that it presents the 
other matter herein as being of interest in this connection. 

This widely-beneficent movement has been slowly evolving. 
Through the well-directed efforts of the many Peace Societies 
throughout the world and the work of the many illustrious 
men and women who have devoted themselves to this cause 


during the past two decades, the beginning of the end appears 
to be at hand. 

The active interest that 


Theodore Roosevelt, 

President Taft, 

Andrew Carnegie, 

Hon. Elihu Root, 

Miss Jane Addams, 

Secretary Knox, 

Hon. Richard Bartholdt, 

Hon. William Jennings Bryan, 
Hon. Joseph H. Choate, 
Robert Bacon, 

William R. Hearst, 

Whitelaw Reid, 

Mr. Samuel Gompers, 
President David Starr Jordan, 
Mrs. Lucia Ames Mead, 

Hon. George von L. Meyer, 
Hon. Charles Nagel, 

Hon. Horace Porter, 

Hon. Albert K. Smiley, 

Mrs. Henry Villard, 

Hon. George W. Wickersham, 
Hon. Frederick W. Lehmann, 
Prof. John Bassett Moore, 
Hon. Theodore Burton, 

Rev. F. A. Ivahler, 

Elbert Hubbard, 

B. O. Flower, 

Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy, 
Archbishop Ireland, 

Robert G. Ingersoll, 

David Lubin, 

Edwin Ginn, 

and many others in our fair 


W. O. McDowell, 

Hon. James B. McCreary, 

Hon. David J. Brewer, 

Hon. W. I. Buchanan, 

Hon. John W. Foster, 

Rev. Edward Everett Hale, 
Bishop W. F. McDowell, 

Edwin D. Mead, 

Hon. J. M. Dickinson, 

Hon. Robert Treat Paine, 

Most Rev. James E. Quigley, 
Hon. James Brown Scott, 

Hon. Oscar S Strauss, 

Dr. Booker T. Washington, 

Rev. Emil G. Hirsch, 

Dr. Benj. F. Trueblood, 

Dr. Lyman Abbott, 

Rev. James L. Tryon, 

John Temple Graves, 

Mrs. Annie Besant, 

Cardinal Gibbons, 

Hon. Richard A. Ballinger, 
Andrew D. White, 

Hon. W. W. Morrow, 

Rev. Robert Stuart MacArthur. 
Hamilton Holt, 

Dr. Benjamin Ide Wheeler, 

W. H. Short, 

Geo. E. Roberts, 

Rev. Jenkin Lloyd Jones, 

Hon. Frank G. Newlands, 

Hon. James A. Tawney, 

Hon. Chas. W. Fairbanks, 

land—not to mention those in the 


4 


public eye, of other lands, such as Leo XIII., Count Tolstoy, 
King Edward, the Czar, William T. Stead, Baron d’Estour- 
nelles de Constant, Baron Marschall von Bieberstein and the 
distinguished recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize—the active 
interest that all these advocates of peace are evincing, is 
rapidly aggregating into an irresistible potency that will even¬ 
tually rid the world of the heart-break of war, and save the 
struggling poor from the paralyzing incubus of military ex¬ 
penditures. 

That practical results can be had in a world-movement is 
attested by the fact that all the great nations have recently 
founded the International Institute of Agriculture. David 
Lubin, an American, carried to a successful conclusion this 
beneficent project—with the result that 1910 will see this 
Institute undertaking the work for which it was designed. 

In the cause of Universal Peace two great ideas have been 
recently promulgated in the United States. One is the sug¬ 
gestion by Secretary Knox of the establishment of a Court of 
Arbitral Justice. The other is a suggestion of the appoint¬ 
ment of a special peace commission composed of men such 
as Theodore Roosevelt, Andrew Carnegie, Elihu Root, Richard 
Bartholdt and Joseph H. Choate, to formulate definite, prac¬ 
tical plans for the speedier effectuation of permanent peace. 
There is no conflict in these ideas. Both are in line with real 
progress and both are meeting with approval in America and 
in Europe. 

Furthermore, the recent donation of one million dollars by 
Edwin Ginn of Boston to assist the cause of Universal Peace 
is certain to be productive of results. 

At this auspicious moment when there is being contemplated 
the wasting of hard-earned hundreds of millions in the build¬ 
ing of monsters of the air, in addition to monsters of the sea, 
for the destruction of the lives and property of the very 
people who will have supplied, through a burdensome taxa¬ 
tion, the means for their construction, it is most earnestly to 


5 


be hoped that the press of the world will pour lavishly into the 
channels of thought this magnificent idea of peace universal 
through practical arbitration. Let the art of aviation be the 
sign of a new day. Let it not be devoted to destruction. Let 
it serve to bring the nations closer together, on the ground of 
a higher morale. May the press, with its unlimited power for 
good, espouse wholeheartedly this paramount cause of to-day. 


6 


The Federation of the World 

By WALTER JOHN BARTNETT 

The federation of the world—a conception so grandiose as 
probably to seem chimerical to one who has not observed 
the signs of the times, seems nevertheless to be slowly but 
surely taking form and substance. 

Far in the past, on the minds of the world-conquerors, 
shone the ideal of a world united. In the present, on many 
a mind is shining this great ideal; but now has the dreamt-of 
tyranny of the past been glorified into the idea of a union of 
the nations in a voluntary federation. 

Like the growth of a tree from a seed, the growth of the 
modern ideal has been of an inevitable and fateful character; 
and in its present stage a discerning eye can perceive the 
outlines of the grand consummation. 

Immediately preceding the more definite conception of a 
world-federation are to be seen a number of nourishing 
factors—each adding its quota, its energy; as, for example, 
the application of steam to navigation and to land trans¬ 
portation, the extension of telegraph and telephone, the in¬ 
dustrial inventions which have rendered each country de 1 
pendent on others for vast quantities of supplies, the practice 
of international loaning of money, the growth of interna¬ 
tional brotherhoods, the readier and cheaper production of 
books, the growth of the press, the increase of general edu¬ 
cation, together with the potent humanizing activities of the 

great Republic of Letters, and the consequent partial eradi¬ 
cation of national prejudices; each of these bringing material 

benefit and inculcating ideas of interdependence and mutual 
help on a national scale. 


7 


Let us consider now that which corresponds to the sapling 
—the young form which, out of the darkness and groping 
of the life in the soil, has risen to view and, though but 
partly developed, foreshadows the coming tree. 

It is commonly accepted that the welfare and prosperity of 
mankind depend more upon agriculture than upon any other 
industry. Statistics from all lands on the production and 
consumption of agricultural products, intelligently dis¬ 
seminated, must affect the destinies of millions of people. 
Official and reliable data concerning the results obtained by 
such men as Luther Burbank, and miscellaneous informa- 
tion such as that gathered by organizations like the United 
States Department of Agriculture, if spread throughout the 
world freely for the benefit of all who are interested, cannot 
but profoundly influence for the better the agriculture of the 
world and consequently improve the condition of the people. 
If the advance made by our farmers in wheat-growing dur¬ 
ing the past ten years could be intelligently presented to the 
peasants of Russia, much of the agrarian trouble of that 
country would be remedied. If the information that the 
California fruit-growers possess could be transmitted to the 
agriculturists in Siberia, fruit-growing would in a decade be 
one of the great industries of a large portion of that terri¬ 
tory. On the other hand, could the agriculturists of our 
country receive accurate information freely and readily con¬ 
cerning the products of field and orchard and vineyard of 
the remainder of the world, our advance in these matters 
must , proceed apace. The food supply of hundreds of mil¬ 
lions of people is now being brought from far-distant points; 
to cheapen the marketing and insure the purity of this food 
must necessarily enhance the well-being of those who de¬ 
pend 'upon it. Reliable information as to crops and as to 
agricultural products in storage and in transit the world 
over, will tend to promote a better adjustment of supply to 
demand, promptly and sometimes with incalculable benefit 
to millions of people, as in cases of threatened famine. 


8 


The United States of America spends millions per annum 
in securing information of this character pertaining to its 
own territory, but the benefits derived are but partial, owing 
to the lack of accurate statistics concerning other countries. 

The inference from all this is: that the welfare of the 
world is to a considerable degree suffering from a want of 
co-operation of the nations in this very vital department of 
human activity; and that it would be to the advantage of 
all were the governments of the world to come to an agree¬ 
ment on this subject—an agreement best embodied in a per¬ 
manent form, perhaps, by the establishment of an internat¬ 
ional board of competent delegates from each nation, whose 
duty it should be to promote the advancement of all forms 
of agriculture throughout the world irrespective of nation¬ 
ality or of personal interests. 

* 

To one man belongs the honor of perceiving this clearly 
and of bringing it about—Mr. David Lubin, of California. 
Through his efforts was the King of Italy converted to his 
views. Thereupon under the leadership of the King was 
inaugurated a movement of such strength that finally forty- 
two nations assented to the plan of co-operation proposed; 
and but a short time ago the Senate of the United States 
ratified a protocol committing our country to its support. 
Thus has been born the International Institute of Agricul¬ 
ture, to be supported by funds from the treasuries of nearly 
all nations—the first voluntary world-movement of all-embrac¬ 
ing, import. 

So interrelated are human affairs that, having been firmly 
established and begun its work, this institute will gradually 
enlarge its scope and more and more firmly cement the 
common interests of mankind throughout the world. And 
so potent is suggestion and so fecund are fundamental ideas, 
that from this new organization and that older one, the Inter¬ 
national Postal Union, which has accomplished so much for 
the intercommunication of the peoples of the world, will 
spring others of their sort. 


9 


The movements which are embodied in the Interparlia¬ 
mentary Union and the American Society of International 
Law are directed towards the codification of international 
law and the firm establishment of principles that will be 
recognized by the courts of every land. During the Russo- 
Japanese troubles the peoples of many lands were concerned 
with the question as to what articles were contraband. The 
principles of international law as interpreted by various 
writers were not uniform, the result being that merchants 
were at a loss as to what course of action to follow. This is 
an example of many that might be presented wherein great 
benefits will flow from the coming together of all nations in 
an institution that will reduce these matters to order and 
uniformity; the principles finally settled upon, to become active 
by being incorporated in the various international treaties. 

In connection with the establishment of the International 
Institute of Agriculture and the formulation of definite laws 
operative between the nations in peace and in war, there may 
well be considered the establishment of a permanent body of 
delegates to regulate matters of international commerce, thus 
providing for greater commercial freedom minimizing the 
risks of commerce, and affording greater legal protection and 
personal security to the people that engage in commerce. 
Through the power of the Federal Government to regulate 
interstate commerce, the United States of America has been 
able to correct some of the greater abuses that flow from the 
selfishness of man; for instance, that of the sale of impure 
foods, and that of the lack of sanitation of packing estab¬ 
lishments. Such matters could be regulated on a world-wide 
scale by an International Commerce Commission. 

In relation to the foregoing, and matters for consideration 
by such a commission, are the following:-— 

I. The adoption of a uniform standard of exchange 
throughout the world. We all know the great benefits that 
have resulted from the adoption by many nations of the gold 
standard. Yet the adoption of this standard is but a part of 


10 


the great work that must be done to render stable the com¬ 
merce of the nations. When all have adopted the gold 
standard—as they doubtless will—a second step will be re¬ 
quired, namely,— 

2. The adoption of a common system of exchange, or 
money which will be good the world over. There is no 
reason why a system of exchange cannot be devised that will 
be a common measure of value in all civilized lands. 

3. The establishment of a common standard of weights 
and measures. The good this will accomplish is obvious. The 
use of the metric system is gradually being extended; in 
another decade it will probably have become practically 
universal. 

4 . The introduction of a universal language. Such a lan¬ 
guage, of scientific construction and capable of easy expansion 
concurrent with growing needs of nomenclature due to new 
inventions -and scientific discoveries,—a language which shall, 
along with the mother-tongue, be taught in the schools of all 
nations,—would be an important factor in the promotion of 
international undestanding and popular benefit. 

Through all these things will the peoples of the earth be 
brought into closer and closer commercial relations. Com¬ 
merce will be greatly increased. In many ways will the mater¬ 
ial welfare of all be advanced. Through the masses of the 
populations will be diffused a greater and greater knowledge; 
and the consequent better understanding of one another will 
result in a further gain—a gain inexpressible in terms of com¬ 
merce. 

The question may now be asked: What is to be the effect 
of these movements upon the destiny of nations? 

Let us try to answer this. 

First: The true function of government is the advancement 
of the welfare of all classes. This function applies most par¬ 
ticularly to the care of the proletariat. To advance the masses 


II 


morally and intellectually it is essential to advance them first 
in a material way: it is requisite to supply them with work 
and increase their productive capacity—their power of acquir¬ 
ing for themselves from soil and mine and factory and trade 
a greater income and thus a better environment and more 
leisure. For example, the people of Russia must be taught 
how to utilize the energy of their vast water-power, as the 
people of the State of New York use that of Niagara and the 
Californians that of the streams of the Sierra Nevada. The 
workers of the world who are following primitive methods 
must be shown how to more fully develope the energies of 
soil and mine and stream through modern methods. Thus 
will be aroused in them renewed and more intelligent indus¬ 
try, with greater scope for the employment of their minds: 
this, seemingly slow though it may be, will inevitably result 
in intellectual, moral, spiritual, and political progress. This 
awakening of the higher nature in the masses will gradually 
be brought about by the interworking of many factors, 
notably through free and compulsory education, but chiefly 
perhaps through the wide diffusion by the individual govern¬ 
ments of knowledge appealing to the immediate self-interest 
of men, enabling them to earn more with a given amount of 
labor—knowledge derived from the general information and 
the statistics published by such international institutes as we 
have spoken of. 

Secondly: The greater enlightenment of the people of all 
lands means ultimately the greater stability of government. 
As the people become more enlightened, they wdll have an 
ever-growing voice in government. As this proceeds, they 
will demand—and some are beginning to demand it now— 
freedom from the burden of taxation for the purpose of 
maintaining the immense standing armies and the great 
navies. In Italy the income tax alone is 14 per cent of in¬ 
comes, and the total tax in some sections of that country 
amounts to 30 per cent of the gross earnings of the people. 
Already in Italy there is a movement of great proportions 
opposing the voting of further sums for army and navy. 


12 


The masses of Hungary are thinking the same way, as also 
are a large party in France and a considerable party in Ger¬ 
many. The prosperity of Canada and Australia has tended 
to broaden the minds of the masses of England in respect 
to taxation: perhaps it was partly in consequence of this that 
the voters of England in the last election more forcibly 
than ever before expressed themselves in opposition to the 
expenditure of large sums of money for the maintenance of 
the army. 

In this connection the Russian nation is a particularly in¬ 
teresting subject. The peasants of Russia are thinking po¬ 
tently. The Douma, temporarily discountenanced, will pro¬ 
bably become within a decade a power little dreamed of to¬ 
day by many of the statesmen of Europe. Russia is the one 
country in Europe that can be called the United States of 
Europe. The most despotic of governments, she neverthe¬ 
less is thinking today the thoughts of America and studying 
American institutions, and in the next twenty years will have 
enforced many of the distinctively American ideas. Like the 
United States, she is composed of many races. The Russian 
territories contain a population of 140,000,000 people, divided 
into hi races. During the past thirty years the government 
has been preparing for the formation of the most democratic 
state in all Europe: unconsciously it has been laying the 
foundations of a great constitutional monarchy with power 
vested in the people. This has been partly accomplished 
through the intercommunication between remote portions of 
the Empire provided by the construction of one of the great¬ 
est railroad systems in the world. The government now 
owns about 30,000 miles of railroads, valued at more than 
$1,500,000,000. When the history of the past century is 
written, the construction of the great Siberian Railroad must 
be recorded as one of the most potent civilizing factors of 
the century. Along the line of that railroad millions of peas¬ 
ants will settle in the next twenty years. Emigration from 
European Russia into the Siberian territory will be rapid. 
Russia now has her outlet on the Pacific. She contemplates 


13 


building a new railroad to run from Lake Baikal through 
Chinese territory to Pekin and the port of Tientsin. This 
road will open to the people of Siberia, for their agricultural 
products and their timber, the great markets of China; and 
the construction of the Panama Canal will give to this vast 
country a world-market. When it is remembered that Siberia 
is as large as the United States, that it is situated mostly in 
the temperate zone, that it is fertile, and that in great part 
the climate resembles that of the State of Illinois, one can 
readily understand that here the Russian peasant will rapidly 
advance materially and commercially, and that the form of 
government he will ultimately have, will be a liberal one 
modeled in all probability after that of the United States. 

It is the destiny of the United States to extend a friendly 
hand to the civilization that will develop in the Russian 
territory bordering on the shores of the Pacific. With the 
friendly aid of the United States, the great markets that will 
open up for the products of field and forest and mine and 
factory of all Russia, the gradual enlightenment of the farm¬ 
ers and operatives of all classes in the way of improved 
methods learned through the agency of the international in¬ 
stitutes, the whole population of the Empire will come in 
time to have the same incentives to general progress that 
the people of the United States have; they will see their op¬ 
portunities in the lands they already possess, will endeavor 
to develop them to the utmost, and, like the peoples of other 
countries, will mightily oppose through their representatives 
in the Douma the maintenance of a great standing army. 

As a general proposition we may say that the principle of 
the government of the people by the people for the people, 
is becoming universal, and that when the peoples of the 
European countries finally express themselves fully, it will 
be first and foremost in the way of refusing to pay taxes 
for the maintenance of great armies and navies. This will 
probably occur within the next twenty years; it will be a 
bloodless revolution; and its effect will be most beneficial and 
far-reaching, as the following considerations will indicate:_ 


14 


The expenditures by the nations of Europe for military 
and naval purposes aggregate probably more than $1,500,- 
000,000 per year. In the standing armies and the navies of 
these nations there are now about 4,000,000 men. This vast 
number of men constitutes just so much energy directed to 
other than productive ends. What it costs to maintain these 
men represents, on the one hand, money derived from gov¬ 
ernmental revenues other than taxes, which money might be 
used by the government for the public benefit; and on the 
other hand, money derived from taxes, which money, retained 
by the tax-payers, would better their condition. 

Were European states to disarm as against one another 
and retain armies and navies for policing only, there would 
probably be released say three-quarters of these 4,000,000 
men, or 3,000,000 men in good physical condition, among 
them a considerable number of very intelligent minds. As¬ 
suming that one-tenth of these would emigrate to the New 
World, we have left 2,700,000 to engage in productive work 
in European countries. Of these about 135,000 would be 
officers, men of trained minds. Assuming that these 2,700,- 
000 men would, on an average, earn $400 per year apiece, 
this would mean an increase of over $1,000,000,000 per year 
in wages alone. It is likely, too, that the great majority of 
these men would work for others and receive wages consider¬ 
ably lower than the value they produce. 

And further: We should have that part of the govern¬ 
mental revenues other than taxes, and that part of the in¬ 
comes of civilians expended by them as taxes, at present 
devoted to the maintenance of these men and the equipment, 
fortifications, men-of-war, etc., corresponding to them—re¬ 
distributed and turned into more beneficial channels. The 
money thus set free to be applied to public improvements, 
and that now expended by civilians as taxes, but in the event 
of disarmament restored to them, would amount in round 
numbers to, say, $1,000,000,000. 

We should therefore have to the credit of European na- 

15 


tions, as the result of disarmament, a yearly increment of 
wealth which we may conservatively estimate at $1,000,000,- 
000, and a yearly addition to public improvements and per¬ 
sonal comiort and well-being represented by the amount of 
$1,000,000,000 —a total betterment of $2,000,000,000! 

While the foregoing figures cannot in any case be con¬ 
sidered exact, they nevertheless are so nearly so as to indi¬ 
cate the magnitude of the benefit that would result from dis¬ 
armament. 

In addition to the above, the following words from Mr. 
Vivian of the British House of Commons are to the point:— 
“War expenditure lessens the national and commercial credit, 
intensifies the unemployed problem, reduces the resources 
available for social reform, and presses with exceptional 
severity upon the industrial classes.” 

And the following from an editorial in “The Japan 
Weekly Chronicle” (Kobe) :—“War” (and the writer might 
have added—a constant readiness for war) “ creates an in¬ 
cubus of debt which lies as a permanent dead weight upon 
a country’s life and enterprise—which militates against those 
works of public utility absolutely necessary for the national 
progress, and necessarily imposes a burden of taxation 
which is felt by every class.” 

The following also is pertinent:—In 1905 England spent 
on her army and navy an amount exceeding $300,000,000, 
whereas in the same year she appropriated to Education, 
Science and Art only $79*000,000. These figures need no 
comment. 

As reason, or the great common-sense of mankind, is bound 
to triumph in the end, we may predict with confidence that— 
now that the movement has been started—the benefits that 
so obviously will accrue from the cessation of international 
wars, will eventually and perhaps in but a few years appeal 
with so compelling a force to the peoples of Europe that 
the governments will finally heed their voice and gradually 
disarm. In tnis it is likely that the weaker nations will lead. 


16 


Italy—ever one of the first nations to advance new move¬ 
ments—will vote to disarm, retaining but a moderate stand¬ 
ing army and a small navy. France will follow. The people 
of England will presently refuse to appropriate money for 
extensions of the military or the navy; this the precursor of 
disarmament, which will follow in time. Even the people of 
Germany, headed as they are by the ambitious Kaiser, who is 
the sole force of any magnitude opposing the peace-idea, will 
in the course of a few years bring about reforms in the in¬ 
terests of reason and general well-being. 

The nations having partly disarmed, due to the enlighten¬ 
ment of the people and their greater voice in the government, 
the appeal to arms in cases of international friction will in¬ 
dubitably become less potent than the appeal to peace through 
arbitration—with the consequent maintenance of commercial 
and governmental stability. 

Therefore—repeating our propositions: first, that the true 
function of government is the advancement of the welfare 
of all classes; and secondly, that the greater enlightenment 
of the people of all lands means ultimately the greater sta¬ 
bility of government; and setting beside these propositions 
the fact that the principle of the government of the people 
by the people for the people is becoming universal, and the 
fact that the nations are beginning to realize the self-in¬ 
terest that lies in co-operation—we have a warrant unim¬ 
peachable for the faith that is in us; namely, that in the 
course of but a few years we shall see the shaping of a true 
world-movement—for Japan and China, the United States of 
America, and the rest of the civilized world will join with 
the nations of Europe—toward the effectuation of an inter¬ 
national understanding embodied in a permanent institution 
of universal scope. 

We have now considered those things that correspond to 
the hidden, unconscious forces which precede the appearance 
of the tree above ground, and we have considered the things 
which correspond to the early growth and gradual shaping 


17 


of the tree: let us now consider that which corresponds to 
the tree itself, developed. 

In this permanent institution in which all nations will join, 
the full characteristics of the world-federation will begin to 
show forth—hesitatingly at first, for it will be subjected 
to storms of criticism, blights of self-interest, heats of pre¬ 
judice; but, even so, it will grow the hardier, and more deep¬ 
ly will it send its roots down into the heart of humanity and 
to greater purpose will it raise aloft its noble presence in 
the pure air of altruism, of universal benefit and good-will. 

This permanent institution, this parliament of widest 
scope, which is to embody the international understanding, 
will from its very nature eventually include within its pur¬ 
view the more specialized international institutes. The de¬ 
tails of its development we can hardly foretell with definite¬ 
ness, but we may say with some confidence that the earliest 
action taken by the great nations of the world will pro¬ 
bably be the signing of a protocol whereby they will cede 
to the jurisdiction of the parliament a certain armament, a 
certain number of ships and sailors and soldiers, for the pur¬ 
pose of executing the decrees of the tribunal; thus enabling 
all the nations with safety to disarm as against one another, 
retaining only such armies and navies as they may need for 
policing purposes. The protocol will develop into a consti¬ 
tution providing for executive, judicial and legislative de¬ 
partments, and embodying articles which in time all nations 
will ratify. And upon this must inevitably follow the arbi¬ 
tration of international disputes, the cessation of interna¬ 
tional war. 

Strange is it to contemplate—and we see in it the working 
of the Reason which rules the world—that to the head of the 
most despotic of the great nations and to a representative of 
the most democratic belongs the credit of first practically 
urging the idea of the promotion of a peace universal: to the 
Czar Nicholas and to Andrew Carnegie is the world in¬ 
debted for the preliminary shaping of this grand conception. 


18 


Mr. Carnegie has given much thought to this subject. 
Several years ago he pointed out the great benefits that must 
result from the organization of the nations into “The United 
States of the World.” His interest in the American Society 
of International Law and in the peace conferences, and his 
construction at dhe Hague of the Temple of Peace, where 
will be housed the International Board of Arbitration and 
also, we hope, the International Institute of Agriculture and 
all other international institutes, for we believe that in this 
case the sooner will be effected the union of all in a true In¬ 
ternational Parliament—all this on the part of Mr. Carnegie 
will contribute much to the success of this great movement 
which has for its object the preservation of peace and the in¬ 
creased well-being of the peoples of all lands. 

It is greatly to be desired that the International Institute 
of Agriculture be permanently housed at The Hague. The 
presence there of the representatives of that institute, work¬ 
ing together to better the economic conditions of their re¬ 
spective countries, would be a factor of great potency in ad¬ 
vancing the cause of the Internatinal Board of Arbitration 
and universal peace. The Temple of Peace should be se¬ 
lected as the home for all the world-movements. 

With the federation of the nations under a constitution 
ratified by all; with the devotion of human energies in this 
way to the material, intellectual, and moral welfare of hu¬ 
manity; with the growth of tolerance through knowledge; 
with the perception which is bound to arise, of the inter¬ 
relation of all mankind and of the fact that the happiness 
and prosperity of other peoples contribute to our own pros¬ 
perity and happiness—with all this we have the fullness of 
growth which corresponds to the developed and firmly planted 
tree—a tree, indeed, whose trunk is humanity itself, whose 
greater limbs are the greater nations and whose smaller limbs 
are the smaller nations, whose roots are the roots of humanity 
in the Source of All, whose sap is the Spirit of Life. 

Inevitable, fateful, not to be stayed in its growth—obvi- 


19 



ously a part of the Divine Plan—proceeds this great idea. 
Let the mothers and the teachers of all lands aid in its prog¬ 
ress. To spread this gospel is a work of sublime import¬ 
ance. Men and women are needed for this, and men and 
women are needed in whom to embody the delegated powers 
of the nations. In every nation is one person best fitted to 
serve as its representative. At the present we are singularly 
favored—we Americans: our most efficient person is known 
to us. I refer to our President, Theodore Roosevelt. 

Already has President Roosevelt achieved for himself a 
permanent place in history. The great services he has, even 
so far, rendered the cause of international arbitration and of 
the world’s peace, have determined that. His timely and 
insistent mediation in the Russo-Japanese war resulted in 
bringing to a conclusion and to a satisfactory settlement one 
of the most costly and bloody conflicts in the history of civ¬ 
ilization. His work, together with that of President Mc¬ 
Kinley and John Hay, prevented the partition of China; and 
during his administration the United States has taken its 
place among the great world-powers. Besides this, the ten¬ 
dency of his mind and scope of his thought are plainly 
evinced in his recent sending of Mr. Root on his mission to 
our sister nations in South America—a mission which will 
not only assure them of our cordiality and good will, but 
will tend to bring them into closer relations with one an¬ 
other and ameliorate greatly the industrial, commercial and 
other conditions prevailing among them, by leading them to 
the principle of resorting in cases of misunderstanding, not 
to arms, but to arbitration, thus to a considerable extent 
directing them into line with the great world-movements, 

When Mr. Roosevelt shall have completed his work as 
Chief Executive, what better cause can he serve than that 
of the active promotion of universal peace? Our countrv 
urgently needs as its representative in the conferences at The 
Hague a man such as he. It should appoint him, and should 
empower him unstintedly to act with his confreres frcm the 


20 


other great nations in formulating a plan for international ar¬ 
bitration and federation. He has proved his worth and his 
capacity. He would attain the end he set out to attain. We 
hope—nay, we urge, that when the time is opportune, the 
United States of America constitute him its Permanent Dele¬ 
gate to the International Board of Arbitration, the first Par¬ 
liament of the Federation of the World. 

How better conclude than with the vision of a poet whose 
insights the world is hastening to verify and confirm to the 
full? Looking from the past to the future, he noted the pro¬ 
gress of humanity from the reign of physical force and com¬ 
pulsion—the day of the brute in man—and saw it culminate 
in the regnancv of moral suasion and justice—the day of 
true manhood, when: 

. the war-drum throbb’d no longer, and the battle-flags were 
furl’d 

In the Parliament of man, the Federation of the world." 

And going farther—searching to the heart of things with the 
eye of insight—he prophesies the next step, the elimination of 
internal, that is, industrial or insurrectionary, strife under the 
sway of Reason,—the outcome of it all when: 

** , . the common sense of most shall hold a fretful realm in awe, 

And the kindly earth shall slumber, lapt in universal law. 


From The Arena, Nov., 1907. 


21 



Editorial Comment in “The Arena” 


The Federation of the World:* In The Federation of the 
World, by Walter John Bartnett, a prominent member of 
the American Society of International Law, our readers will 
find a broad, statesmanlike paper in which the author shows 
how mighty forces are rapidly making for world federation. 
His own position is that of an enlightened statesman who has 
thought deeply upon the great subject which he discusses. He 
holds that the true function of government is the advancement 
of the welfare of all classes; that the great enlightenment of 
the people of all lands must ultimately result in the greater 
stability of government; that the principle of government of 
the people, by the people and for the people is becoming uni¬ 
versal ; and that the nations are beginning to realize the self- 
interest that lies in co-operation; while in the various move¬ 
ments already inaugurated which look toward world union 
along various lines, we have a warrant for believing that “in 
the course of a few years we shall see the shaping of a true 
world-movement * * * toward the effectuation of an 

international understanding embodied in a permanent institu¬ 
tion of universal scope/’ The paper is one that should chal¬ 
lenge the attention of all lovers of humanity and human 
progress. 

*The Arena, Nov., 1907, 


22 


Andrew Carnegie on the Peace Movement 

"‘I live in the belief that soon men will awaken to the great¬ 
est of all duties. We have abolished slavery—the owning of 
man by man. There remains the greater sin of the killing of 
man by man. 

“Our race has abolished private war—duels—between men 
and established the rule of law. No man can dishonor an¬ 
other; no nation can dishonor another. All honor’s wounds 
are self-inflicted. Therefore, every civilized man must sub¬ 
mit his wrongs to a court of law. 

“It devolves upon our race to teach the civilized world that 
international disputes must likewise be settled by law and the 
reign of international peace established. 

“This is a most propitious time, Christmas eve, when the 
thoughts of all turn from their daily cares to that peace and 
good will which leads us to pray: 

That come it may, as come it will, for a* that, 

That man to man, the world o'er, shall brothers be for a’ that. 

“Every ruler and every statesman proclaims that the money 
they spend upon armaments, military and naval, is solely to 
secure peace, and in this these men are absolutely honest. 

“There is not a ruler or statesman in the world to-day who 
desires war, but while every nation builds its fleets every one 
of these becomes a menace to other nations because they can 
easily be converted into instruments of destruction. 

“Armaments beget armaments. 

“The building of ships arouses suspicion between nations, 
There is no surety for peace where suspicion dwells. 

“If I had my way there would be a meeting called of three 
or four of the foremost men in each country, instructed to 
sit down and determine why it is that while every ruler and 
statesman desires peace, none is able to secure it. This ques¬ 
tion should be asked of every nation in turn: 


23 


“ You are earnest in your desire for peace. Why would it 
not be secured by an agreement such as has been made in 
regard to marine captures, to allow disputes to be settled by a 
corresponding Supreme Court? Why would not that give 
you your heart’s desire? If you do not favor this, why? 

“Let the answer of each nation be recorded that we may 
see who are really with us and who are against us. The party 
disagreeing would have to give some reason for unwillingness 
to adopt the means for securing it. In this movement there is 
no question but that the leadership belongs to our industrial 
Republic. 

“I believe that if President Taft were to appoint a com¬ 
mittee of three commissioned to visit the belligerent nations 
now increasing their armaments and ask that question the 
answers would shed a flood of light upon the question. One 
great step would be gained, for we could point to the party or 
parties responsible for the continuance of the brutal system 
of killing each other and appealing to force, which determines 
not who is right, but simply who is strong. It is difficult 
to understand how any conscientious man can appeal to such 
a tribunal.” 

“Of all men living and free to take up this cause, Theodore 
Roosevelt is without a competitor. If any man can discover 
the true path to international peace it is Theodore Roosevelt. 
It is, as far as I see, the position most worthy of his past and 
of his future. 

“A few nations, say Germany, Great Britain and the United 
States—all three of the one Teutonic race—are absolutely 
necessary, but we should and would have France and others. 
Soon or late they must come to it. There are evidences in 
Europe now that the peoples in these countries are not dis¬ 
posed to approve the vast expenditure necessary to build and 
maintain Dreadnoughts. 

“Last year Britain spent on her navy $345,000,000; Ger¬ 
many, $223,000,000, and the United States, $470,000,000, in¬ 
cluding pension. Here is more money than needed to build 


24 


the Panama Canal. There is spent by the United States Gov¬ 
ernment for this purpose more money than sufficient to estab¬ 
lish a system of internal water navigation throughout our 
whole country. Not one particle of return is received from 
it; on the contrary, the ships rot or become obsolete and 
worthless. 

“Delegates of the eight naval powers—Germany, France, 
Italy, Russia, Austria-Hungary, Japan, Britain and the United 
States—sitting in London unanimously agreed to establish an 
international supreme court to deliver final judgment upon all 
cases of marine captures, each nation appointing one judge. 

“The same powers have only to decree that hereafter dis¬ 
putes between all civilized nations shall be settled in a like 
manner, or by arbitration, and war would become a thing of 
the past. 

“Opposition must be expected from the professional classes 
in our army and navy. These may have the support of manu¬ 
facturers of steel and war material, but these combined will 
be found of little moment when the people are fully informed. 

“The thousands of millions saved by such a plan would nec¬ 
essarily find avenues for investment in other directions, and 
so far from any branch of trade being injured, it would be 
replaced tenfold by the necessary investment of capital which 
is now expended upon war. 

“I think the suggestion made to the Foreign Powers for 
international peace by Secretary Knox, of the State Depart¬ 
ment, is admirable—a step in the right direction, and I am 
most anxious to hear the responses. I am glad The American 
has taken up the subject. It reaches the common people, and 
after all, it is upon the masses that we must depend. 

“In this connection, nothing is more notable than the visits 
being exchanged between the workingmen of Germany, Brit¬ 
ain and France. The warmest friendships are being formed 
among this class, and the note everywhere is that the laboring 
men of all others do not want to attack one another. Their 


25 


interest can be understood, as they suffer for the necessaries 
of life. Wealth has no such ordeal to endure.” 

"Do you see any immediate good that will come to the indus¬ 
trial world from such an agreement as proposed between the 
nations?” Mr. Carnegie was asked. 

“I do not see how it can be questioned,” came the prompt 
reply. “If as the figures show, it would save the United 
States over a million dollars a day, which is producing noth¬ 
ing, and put it into productive enterprises, it goes without the 
saying it would benefit mankind.” 

“Do you believe that the reign of peace among men would 
favorably react upon the relations between the employer and 
the employed?” 

“I feel confident that the reign of peace among men would 
react upon all ranks and conditions of men; but as long as man 
tolerates the killing of his fellowmen, we have little hope for 
the advancement of our race. The end we should aim at is 
to strengthen the sense of brotherhood between men, and 
when we teach men that the taking of a man’s life is the work 
only of the savage, life upon this earth will be improved in 
every aspect. 

“It is easy to see,” continued Mr. Carnegie, “what the influ¬ 
ence of an international agreement for peace would accom¬ 
plish by simply reviewing a bit of history. Nearly a century 
ago Canada and the United States agreed that upon the inland 
seas, which constitute their boundary for hundreds of miles, 
each should place one ioo-ton vessel armed with one 28- 
pounder. The tiny craft, one flying the Union Jack and the 
other the Stars and Stripes, have never fired a shot except in 
friendly salute to each other, and unbroken peace has been 
preserved. 

“If the world had its police force on the seas, there would 
be the ‘protection from assault’ which each naval power de¬ 
clares is all it desires and is increasing its navy solely to ensure. 
There would remain no enemy from whom protection would 


26 


be needed. Commerce would be immune. The naval nations 
would be as one in friendly alliance. 

“Never were nations as busy as to-day in the hopeless task 
of becoming too powerful to be attacked. Britain and Ger¬ 
many are the principal contestants. Britain has a strong case. 
She cannot feed her people if her food supplies are inter¬ 
rupted on the seas. The fear of starvation would instantly 
create panic and general pillage of food supplies would ensue. 
Hence she has claimed she must possess overwhelming fleets 
and must oppose the great advance which the other Powers 
urge, the immunity of commerce upon the sea. 

i 

“Germany also has a case quite strong enough to give her 
the support of the nation/’ 

“Do you think the talk of war between Germany and Eng¬ 
land will now prevent these two Powers from entering into 
an arrangement such as has been proposed?” 

“On the contrary,” answered Mr. Carnegie, “I think the 
alleged animosity between the two countries is largely arti¬ 
ficial; that the masses of the people are friendly to each other. 
The alarm aroused in Britain just now by the leaders of one 
of the parties is purely political, an attack upon the other party 
which happens to have the reins of government. 

“Mr. Balfour, the leader, although indulging in this effort 
to alarm people, has just stated that he does not himself believe 
that the people of Germany and England are desirous of war. 
It is not the masses of people on either side that we have to 
fear. These are kindly disposed to each other. It is the 
military and naval classes in both countries that are at the 
bottom of the trouble. 

“In this movement now started we need not expect the 
military and naval classes to see their occupations gone without 
protest. We must expect that. In fact, that note sent to the 
powers does not suggest disarmament. Every nation is left 
free to judge for itself what it shall do. 

“My opinion is, however, that in the most advanced coun¬ 
tries public sentiment would soon decree a decided reduction 


27 


of military and naval armament, and as confidence grew 
among the nations more and more, they would realize the folly 
of adding to these. 

“We have a strong peace party in the United States. Mr. 
Roosevelt was never able to get more than one-half the amount 
he asked for the navy, and it is my belief that our Republic 
would give the nations of the world a salutary lesson in re¬ 
ducing its armaments. I earnestly hope that Secretary Knox 
will take place as one of the greatest peace ministers of our 
race.” 

On the danger of armaments, Mr. Carnegie had said: 

“Nations are only aggregations of meil, and the history of 
man proves the folly of arming themselves in the vain hope 
of securing immunity from attack. California is one of the 
most recent examples. Her gold mines attracted hardy adven¬ 
turers from all parts of the world. Courts of justice were 
unknown. Each individual resolved to become ‘too powerful 
to be attacked,’ and armed himself as the best means of secur¬ 
ing peace and safety. 

“The result was entirely the reverse, as it has proved to 
be with the nations. The more men armed themselves the 
greater the number of deadly feuds. There was no peace. 
Anarchy was imminent, but the best element arose and re¬ 
versed this policy. At first the Vigilance Committee was 
formed of the most enlightened citizens, which was soon 
superseded by the regular courts of law. 

“Only when the arming of men was not permitted did the 
reign of peace begin. Thus was that community led to-peace 
by disarmament, and thus only can international peace be 
finally established and the nations rest secure under a police 
force to maintain, never to break, the peace.” 

—Reprint from New York American. 


28 


Outline of the International School of Peace 

. ' ' I 

Read at the Second National Peace Congress, Chicago, 1909. 

By Edwin Ginn, of Boston. 

Although man has been obliged to fight from the beginning, 
yet through the development of ages he has risen in a large 
measure above the necessity of fighting. Formerly the lord 
had his castle upon a spur of the mountain for defense against 
the lawless and against his enemies. This custom was ex¬ 
tended and they would signal each to the other when danger 
threatened. Later it was found to be cheaper and better to 
settle in a town and to build around it high walls which could 
not be scaled. Bwt the walled-town stage has long since 
passed, and we have now reached a state of development where 
physical force within each nation is applied only as a police 
force to restrain the vicious and turbulent. 

But as between nations the earlier conditions still prevail, 
and they still act toward each other as barbarians. They are 
suffering from fear and distrust of each other, almost wholly 
unwarranted. In fact, each individual nation wishes to be un¬ 
disturbed in the peaceful development of its own resources. 
Rarely does one nation desire a conflict with another nation or 
to encroach upon the territory of another. Each one wishes 
to live in harmony with the others. Yet our boundary lines 
are bristling with cannon, the seas are alive with battleships 
and the tramp of the soldier is heard the world over. And 
for what purpose? It is not to curb the turbulent and vicious. 
It is because of a groundless fear of attack from sister nations. 
Such attacks are not really contemplated and ought not to be 
expected. 

It follows that this enormous expense for armies, this taxa¬ 
tion that is draining every year billions from the treasuries of 
the people and bringing want, sickness, suffering and death to 


29 


multitudes, is wholly unnecessary; and the problem of inter¬ 
national peace is how to set in motion forces which will end 
this frightful waste and destruction. I believe that this result 
can be accomplished by appealing to the enlightened selfishness 
of mankind and by setting in motion educational forces, which 
will show the folly of the present status, and will also remove 
the fear and suspicion which are the main causes of our pres¬ 
ent wasteful expenditures for armies and navies. 

It is our desire to establish a fund that shall be so used as 
to cause the nations to see that there is a fully adequate substi¬ 
tute for their present armies and navies; so used as to educate 
the nations to a better knowledge of each other, to have more 
trust in each other; so used as to make the people of each 
nation feel that other nations are on the same level and as 
worthy of confidence as themselves. 

But no substantial progress can be made if the effort runs 
directly counter to the present tendency of thought and action. 
We must adapt our reform movement to the tendencies of the 
time, moving along the line of least resistance. The idea of 
force cannot at once be eradicated. It is useless to believe that 
the nations can be persuaded to disband their present armies 
and dismantle their present navies, trusting in each other or in 
the Hague Tribunal to settle any possible differences between 
them, unless, first, some substitute for the present force is 
provided and demonstrated by experience to be adequate to 
protect the rights, dignity and territory of the respective na¬ 
tions. The idea which underlies the embryonic international 
supreme court which we now have in the Hague Tribunal is 
fundamentally good; but the movement is not yet far enough 
advanced so that the nations can be persuaded to disarm and 
rest for security upon the decisions of a court having its lim¬ 
ited jurisdiction and no power to enforce its decisions. My 
own belief is that the idea which underlies the movement for 
the Hague Court can be developed so that the nations can be 
persuaded each to contribute a small percentage of their mili¬ 
tary forces at sea and on land to an international guard or 


30 


police force. hive per cent, of the present forces would prob¬ 
ably be found sufficient. If this is too small certainly ten per 
cent, of the present armaments would be fully adequate to 
protect all nations in their rights and to prevent any disorder 
or turbulence. This plan involves no marked and revolution¬ 
ary change in the present methods; puts no additional burdens 
of taxation upon the people; but if tried, it will make the 
futility and waste of the present method so obvious that dis¬ 
armament will naturally and inevitably follow, just as disarma¬ 
ment among individuals follows upon the institution and 
maintenance of an adequate police force. When the nations 
see, as I think they will, that this international police force is 
ample to ensure them all their rights, they will be unwilling 
to bear the present excessive burdens for armament, and dis¬ 
armament, or at least nine-tenths of it, will come as a natural 
and inevitable result of a perception of the obvious uselessness 
of armament. 

But the important point to have in mind is that all successful 
reform movements achieve their success by offering a reason¬ 
able and adequate substitute for the erroneous existing sys¬ 
tem. Such a substitute is found, it seems to me, in this sug¬ 
gestion. The benefits which would accrue to the nations and 
to the people from such a result are hard to exaggerate. There 
would no longer be need of any grinding poverty in the land. 
If the people were freed from the present war expenditure, 
every man, woman and child could live in comfort and have 
an opportunity for a good education ; hospitals, schools, and 
churches could be erected wherever there was an occasion; 
swamps and unhealthy parts of the surface of the earth could 
be drained, and highways built to connect every habitable part 
of the globe; railroads, rivers, and canals could furnish trans¬ 
portation for the whole world. 

War and the threat and fear of war constitute to-day an 
economic scourge of almost inconceivable magnitude. Armies 
are not a protection against war; they are the cause of war. 
Every battleship launched is a menace to the peace of the 


31 


world. We shall never have peace until we bring about dis¬ 
armament. I reject utterly the argument that large standing 
armies and navies make for the peace of the nations. We all 
know that, in a barbaric or half-civilized state of society, 
most individuals go armed, and that quarrels, maimings and 
murders are multiplied in consequence. To make peace in the 
community we prevent individuals from carrying arms 
intended for the slaughter or injury of their fellow beings. 
The armed are rarely the peaceful. Precisely so with the 
nations. The unarmed nation is the really peaceful nation. 

The plan which I would follow is somewhat as follows: 

(1) There should be established in corporate form an 
International School of Peace. Such a corporation would be 
a permanent legal machinery for receiving and disbursing con¬ 
tributions and bequests; for it is an important part of my pur¬ 
pose and hope that the fund which I have provided for should 
be but the nucleus and beginning of a great endowment con¬ 
tributed by others and perhaps by governments themselves, to 
forward the great cause. 

(2) This International School of Peace, whether incor¬ 
porated or not incorporated, should have a president, secre¬ 
tary, treasurer and board of managers or directors, making up 
an executive committee, and constituted of men who are known 
for their soundness of judgment as well as for their devotion 
to the public welfare. An Advisory Council, consisting of men 
eminent in the peace movement and arbitration cause, might 
well be constituted. 

(3) There should be a Bureau of Education which should 
attempt to modify the courses of study in our schools, colleges 
and universities by eliminating the use of such literature and 
history as tend unduly to inculcate the military spirit and to 
exaggerate the achievements of war. Too much of our history 
is now devoted to accounts of battles and to the exploits of 
war heroes; too little respect and attention are directed to the 
unselfish and self-sacrificing lives of thousands of noble men 


32 


and women who have striven and achieved mightily for the 
benefit of the race in the fields of peace. 

The teachers in our schools, academies and colleges should 
be interested in this movement and trained to see its import¬ 
ance. 

International exchange of teachers and students, in accord¬ 
ance with the ideas which underlie the Rhodes Scholarships 
and the recent exchange of professors between Germany and 
America, should be further extended, even among the teachers 
of our public schools. Such interchange of students and of 
teaching service tends to break down the absurd and unintelli¬ 
gent prejudices which have hitherto existed, to a considerable 
degree even in our school-rooms, as to the relations and feel¬ 
ings of the people of one race or nation to the people of another 
race or nation. 

Social intercourse among the educators of different nations 
should be extended in every possible way. “Stranger” and 
“enemy” always have been nearly, if not quite, synonymous 
terms. 

The circulation of such books as have already been pub¬ 
lished under the name of “The International Library” should 
be favored and advanced in every possible way, and the pub¬ 
lication and circulation of other books haying an analogous 
purpose and tendency should be encouraged. 

So, also, should the co-operation of the clergy be obtained. 
They should be interested in the peace movement and induced 
to preach upon the various aspects of the movement and to 
work among their parishioners, so that they may make their 
pulpits and lives a real power for “peace on earth and good 
will towards men.” The theological seminaries and other insti¬ 
tutions for training preachers and clergymen should be brought 
to see the importance of this movement and so to frame their 
courses of study and training as to cause the preachers of the 
future both to realize and to preach real peace. 


33 


Either separately or as a part of this Educational Bureau 
there should be an organized attempt to influence the press of 
the world. Facts and arguments tending to show the advan¬ 
tages of peace from an historical and economic standpoint 
should be gathered and distributed to newspapers and maga¬ 
zines everywhere. An editorial corps, thoroughly trained, 
should furnish constantly to the press of the world material 
which would make for peace. One of our present great dan¬ 
gers of war is found in false, misleading and inflammatory 
statements about international relations, written by irrespon¬ 
sible persons and circulated by sensational newspapers. Such 
statements should be carefully investigated, and clear, dis¬ 
passionate explanation and refutation of them made and widely 
published as speedily as possible, before the evil caused by such 
newspapers has had time to gather force and spread itself, as 
hitherto, throughout the world. It ought to be made impos¬ 
sible for any “yellow journal” ever again to be able to boast 
that it has brought on a war. Prompt and authoritative denials 
and explanations of these sensational and evil-w'orking pub¬ 
lications will not only make them less harmful, but will tend to 
lessen the profit derived from them and thus to discourage a 
repetition of the offence. 

Our business organizations—chambers of commerce and 
other similar associations—should be addressed and interested 

in this question of the burdens of war and of the threat of 

» 

war. It is absurd that our business organizations should listen 
with intense interest to a discussion of the effect of the tariff 
upon business or spend a great amount of time and thought in 
devising ways for improving, to a slight degree, transportation 
facilities, and yet entirely overlook the fact that almost, if not 
quite, the greatest single burden that business is now bearing 
is the war burden. 

A careful study of international relations and the cost of 
war from both the historic and the economic point of view 
should be made, and a systematic effort to educate the people 
everywhere to a thorough knowledge of the terrible scourge 


34 


that war and the threat and fear of war are at the present time, 
not only upon governments, but upon all peoples everywhere. 
Ihe people should be made to see that if war expenses are to 
continue to increase in the next few hundred years as they 
have in the last century, the accumulations of civilization are 
in danger of being destroyed and the nations made insolvent. 

(4) A Political Bureau should be instituted, which should 
employ men of statesmanlike grasp and power in all the main 
capitals of the world to watch over the course of legislation 
and to work for the reduction of armaments. Such men should 
scrutinize all matters of international relations and strive in 
every way to prevent trifling causes from exciting interna¬ 
tional disputes and, the war spirit. Many wars should and 
would be prevented if able, discreet and statesmanlike men 
were in the capitals of the world watching and working for 
good understanding and peace. 

Again I would appeal to the enlightened selfishness of man¬ 
kind, and would have men point out how much better it is to 
come to an understanding of each other’s position, to meet each 
other half way in a friendly and compromising spirit, than 
either to plunge into war on such trifling occasions as have 
hitherto caused most of our w r ars, or to continue the increase 
of armaments in the hope of terrorizing other nations to sub¬ 
mit to any unjust demands that one nation may make upon 
another. 

(5) This International School of Peace should co-operate 
in every practicable way with all existing forces, agencies and 
organizations. I am a firm believer in continual activity if 
anything is to be accomplished. This work has never yet been 
undertaken in a broad and systematic way. Every avenue for 
the amelioration of mankind should, so far as possible, be 
availed of and made to contribute to this movement in behalf 
of peace. I would have an organization created that should 
affiliate with and bring all beneficent and benevolent forces to 
work together for this common cause. 


35 


. However carefully we may plan for this great work, its suc¬ 
cess must depend finally upon the kind of men and women 
employed. It is my belief that this organization should aim to 
secure, first, the most talented persons in their line, men and 
women who desire especially to devote their lives to the cause, 
making sure that we have a fund sufficiently large to guarantee 
them a salary adequate to enable them to do their work effec¬ 
tively and at the same time provide themselves with the ordin¬ 
ary comforts of life. Not only should able representatives be 
sought, but men and women in the prime of life, who can look 
forward to a reasonable period of activity. In a great many 
movements too much stress has been placed upon securing 
those who have already achieved great success in the world. 
As a rule men do not achieve such success early in life. It 
comes to them generally as the reward of long years of service, 
after they have reached their fullest maturity. While I 
appreciate the advantages of having the co-operation of such 
as have gained the confidence of the people, I am inclined to 
think that much of this arduous work should be undertaken 
by those who have yet twenty or thirty years of vigorous effort 
to give. It is well to have both classes—those who have been 
tried in the great battles of life and have won a reputation by 
their intelligence, wisdom, and calm judgment; those are the 
men for counsel; but young manhood and womanhood should 
be sought to do the work. 

It is again the story of the bundle of rods. Each in its way 
has a certain strength and can bear a certain amount of strain, 
but when these sticks are brought together, they create a force 
which is irresistible. There are many hundreds of organiza¬ 
tions which are doing splendid work for the elevation of man¬ 
kind, but each is working in its own way. What is needed now 
is to bring into hearty co-operation all these various forces and 
make a united stand against this great cloud overshadowing all 
lands. 

In bringing together our bundle of rods we should not neg¬ 
lect the men of the armies and navies. Here is a most fruit- 


36 


ful field. These men are among the best in the land and would 
not harm their fellows unnecessarily. The most of them 
believe that physical force is needful for the protection of one 
nation against another, and when the military forces believe 
this, it makes it almost certain that it is. If every one believes 
that a war is imminent, it is very difficult to avert it. If there 
were a strong feeling in the hearts of the people of all nations 
that these preparations for war were not necessary, it would 
be much easier to do away with them. If we would have war 
and the preparations for war cease, we must create a sentiment 
favorable to peace. This is the great problem which is before 
us for solution. 

Above all, every one who enters the ranks should do so 
because of an all-absorbing interest in the work. I would 
rather have one, thus equipped, than a hundred of equal abil¬ 
ity who were influenced largely by tne salary to be obtained. 
The success of this organization depends upon the enthusiasm 
we put into it, which must be the enthusiasm of a reformer— 
a Godfrey, a Savonarola, a Garrison, a Phillips—the kind of 
white heat that burns when it touches a community. 



37 


9 


Letter from Mr. Taft 

Read at the Second National Peace Congress, Chicago, 1909. 

The White House, 

Washington, April 28, 1909. 

My Dear Sir: 

I greatly regret that I am unable to attend the coming 
National Peace Conference at Chicago and there to express 
my earnest sympathy with the object of the assembling cf so 
many distinguished men in the interest of world peace. That 
progress has been made in the matter of peace everywhere by 
international action and by the moral pressure of the peoples 
of the earth, anyone who has examined the record must admit. 
It is true that armaments go on increasing in cost, but it is 
also true that the burdens presented by this competition in 
armament are growing heavier and heavier, and the problems 
for solution consistent with their increase become more and 
more difficult. The possibilities of war now arising come 
chiefly from irresponsibilities of government, and in those coun¬ 
tries where stability of internal control is lacking. The United 
States has contributed much to the cause of peace by assisting 
countries weak in respect to their internal government so as 
to strengthen in them the cause of law and order. This rela¬ 
tionship of guardian and ward as between nations and coun¬ 
tries, in my judgment, helps along the cause of international 
peace and indicates progress in civilization. The policy of the 
United States in avoiding war under all circumstances except 
those plainly inconsistent with honor or its highest welfare has 
been made so clear to the world as hardly to need statement 
at my hands. I can only say that so far as my legitimate 
influence extends while at the head of this government, it will 
always be exerted to the full in favor of peace, not only as 
between this country and other countries, but as between our 
sister nations. William H. Taft. 

38 


» 


Theodore Roosevelt 
and the Peace Movement 

By WALTER JOHN BARTNETT 

The peace of the world is rapidly becoming an economic 
question affecting the lives of all civilized people. The heavy 
burden of taxation for army and navy purposes is being felt 
in all lands. Congressman Tawney has pointed out in a force¬ 
ful manner that seventy per cent, of our national revenues is 
being expended during times of peace in preparation for war 
and to meet the expenses of past wars. Is there any remedy 
for this condition, and if so, what is it? 

The peace of the world reposes in the hands of eight men: 
the President of the United States, Emperor William, King 
Edward, the Czar, the President of France, the Emperor of 
Austria-Hungary, the King of Italy and the Emperor of 
Japan. At least six of these eight men are peace advocates. 
The vast majority of the subjects of all of them will now favor 
universal peace and will support measures that will abolish war. 

In times of peace it is costing the nations two thousand mil¬ 
lion dollars annually to be prepared for war. Of this great 
sum ten per cent., or $200,000,000, annually, is sufficient to 
secure universal peace. How can this be done ? By the form¬ 
ation of a federation, or league, of the nations, under limita¬ 
tions, to maintain a court to decide all controversies between 
nations and endowed with power to enforce its decrees by 
means of an adequate armament contributed by the signatory 
states. This Federation would be formed by Articles of Fed¬ 
eration assented to by the leading nations. It would be a 
government of limited sovereignty whose main function would 
be to establish a court (the Hague Tribunal, if you please) 
with power to decide all controversies between nations and to 
enforce its decrees. It would have no jurisdiction to pass 
laws affecting the domestic affairs of the different nations. 


f 


39 


It would not disturb the existing forms of government. The 
Articles of Federation would be comparatively simple. They 
would not be as complicated as the constitution of the United 
States, or as the written constitutions of most of the existing 
governments. The government of the Federated States would 
be limited to the grant of powers made to it by the states 
assenting. It would be supported by contributions to be made 
by the governments uniting in its establishment. It is estimat¬ 
ed that it would require less than $200,000,000 per annum to 
maintain it. If this Federation were once established, the 
great powers would not be obliged to maintain separate armies 
and navies. A saving could thus be affected to the nations of 
from $1,500,000,000 to $1,800,000,000 per annum. 

These ideas are not new. They have been discussed for 

years by practical men interested in the Hague Conference. 
They are supported by statesmen of prominence. A few years 
ago such views would have been deemed visionary, but it 
must be remembered that the dreams of one decade become 
the realities of the next; so will it be with this proposition. 
Secretary Knox is now proposing his Arbitral Court of Justice, 
an admirable proposition as far as it goes. The peace of 
the world cannot be maintained until a court is established 
that will have jurisdiction and power to determine all con¬ 
troversies between nations and enforce its decrees. 

The revenues of the Federation would probably be secured 

along lines somewhat similar to those on which the revenues 
required by the International Institute of Agriculture are se¬ 
cured. This Institute is sustained by the nations. In the estab¬ 
lishment and maintenance of this Institute the nations estab¬ 
lished a precedent which to a great extent can now be followed. 
The revenues that would be annually required by this Federa¬ 
tion would be about those now needed to govern the City of 
New York. They would be but a fraction of the revenues 
that are today received by some of the large corporations in 
the United States. The gross income of the United States 
Steel Corporation for the year 1909, for instance, amounted to 
$646,382,251. The amount paid in wages and salaries during 


40 


that year exceeded $150,000,000. Such a Federation should 
not be as difficult a task to direct as the affairs of the United 
States Steel Corporation. To devise Articles of Federation 
providing for the establishment of a court with power to decide 
all controversies between nations and devise means whereby 
such court would have adequate force to carry into effect its 
decrees, should not prove a formidable task. 

It is believed that a special peace commission headed pre¬ 
ferably by I heodore Roosevelt, and comprising Andrew Car- 
negie, Elihu Root, Joseph H. Choate and Richard Bartholdt or 
men of similar character, could present this or some similar 
idea to the great powers in such manner as to secure their 
assent to a practical plan which would eventuate in the dis¬ 
armament of the nations, thereby materially reducing the ex¬ 
penses of all governments. It is the intention of the World- 
Federation League and some of the leading peace advocates to 
ask Congress to authorize President Taft to appoint such a 
commission. 

The World-Federation League is in harmony with the ef¬ 
forts that are now being made by those working in the inter¬ 
ests of the Hague Conference. It commends the efforts of 
Secretary Knox and President Taft to establish a Court of 
Arbitral Justice. It believes that Congress should empower 
President Taft to appoint a special peace commission to urge 
international federation as a means of establishing universal 
peace. Such a commission could advance Secretary Knox’s 
proposition and probably secure the assent of the leading 
powers to make it a court that would decide all controversies 
between nations instead of certain controversies that may be 
submitted to it. Such a peace commission should not be 
limited in its scope to any one idea; it should be empowered to 
consider any suggestion in the interests of universal peace 
that may be made by other governments. Can anyone doubt 
that practical results would be obtained if Congress should 
empower President Taft to appoint such a commission and if 
Theodore Roosevelt and Andrew Carnegie should become 

members of it? —Reprint from New York American. 

\ 


41 


A Suggestion from William T. Stead 

The immediately pressing thing to do is to get the Powers to 
agree as to how the Judges of the Supreme Court of Interna¬ 
tional Justice should be chosen, and then to work for an 
agreement among all the nations that any Power going to war 
without first appealing to the International Tribunal should be 
boycotted by all the rest. That is practical politics, for if 
the United States alone were to refuse to lend money or 
trade with any belligerent who did not appeal to the Court 
before drawing the sword, everyone would appeal to the 
Court, for we cannot afford to do without the United States. 


A League of Peace 

By ANDREW CARNEGIE 

If the principal European nations were not free through 
conscription from the problem which now disturbs the military 
authorities of Britain, the lack of sufficient numbers willing 
to enter the man-slaying profession, we should soon hear the 
demand formulated for a League of Peace among the nations. 
The subject of war can never be studied without recalling this 
simplest of all modes for its abolition. Five nations co-oper¬ 
ated in quelling the recent Chinese disorders and rescuing their 
representatives in Pekin. It is perfectly clear that these five 
nations could banish war. Suppose even three of them formed 
a League of Peace — inviting all other nations to join — and 
agreed that since war in any part of the civilized world affects 
all nations, and often seriously, no nation shall go to war, 
but shall refer international disputes to the Hague Conference 
or other arbitral body for peaceful settlement, the League 
agreeing to declare non-intercourse with any nation refusing 


42 


I 


compliance. Imagine a nation cut off to-day from the world. 
The League also might reserve to itself the right, where non¬ 
intercourse is likely to fail or has failed to prevent war, to 
use the necessary force to maintain peace, each member of 
the League agreeing to provide the needed forces, or money 
in lieu thereof, in proportion to her population or wealth. 
Being experimental and upon trial, it might be deemed advis¬ 
able, if necessary, at first to agree that any member could with¬ 
draw after giving five years’ notice, and that the League 
should dissolve five years after a majority vote of all the 
members. Further provisions, and perhaps some adaptations, 
would be found requisite, but the main idea is here. 

The Emperor of Russia called the Hague Conference, which 
gave us an International Tribunal. Were King Edward or 
the Emperor of Germany or the President of France, acting 
for their Governments, to invite the nations to send representa¬ 
tives to consider the wisdom cf forming such a League, the 
invitation would no doubt be responded to and probably prove 
successful. 

The number that would gladly join such a League would be 
great, for the smaller nations would welcome the opportunity. 

The relations between Britain, France, and the United States 

to-day are so close, their aims so similar, their territories and 
fields of operation so clearly defined and so different, that 
these Powers might properly unite in inviting other nations to 
consider the question of such a League as has been sketched. 
It is a subject well worthy the attention of their rulers, for of 
all the modes of hastening the end of war this appears the 
easiest and the best. We have no reason to doubt that arbitra¬ 
tion in its present optional form will continue its rapid prog¬ 
ress, and that it in itself contains the elements required 
finally to lead us to peace, for it conquers wherever it is tried; 
but it is none the less gratifying to know that there is in reserve 
a drastic mode of enforcement if needed, which would 
promptly banish war. 

—From the Rectorial Address of Oct. 17, 1905. 


43 


A Christmas Plea for Perpetual and Universal 

* Peace 

JOHN TEMPLE GRAVIES 

For a thousand years the Christmas Festival has been 
heralded as a harbinger of peace to all the world. 

The Angels sang it in swelling chorus on the starlit plains 
of Bethlehem, and the temples of all Christian nations have 
echoed through the centuries the ringing anthem of Peace on 
Earth, Good-will to Men. 

Is it not time, at last, that the platitudes of praise and the 
perpetual paeans to the Prince of Peace should be material¬ 
ized in some brave and earnest effort to bring actual and 
practical tranquillity to a striving and a wrangling world? 

Surely, out of the world knowledge and the world touch of 
this twentieth century of Christ, it should be possible to 
formulate a plan of universal peace. 

The triumphs of steam, of electricity and of air have made 
close neighbors of every earthly kingdom and nation, and the 
horrors of war are painted red upon the history and the heart 
of the civilized race. 

The time has come when the swords of the nations should 
be beaten into plough-shares and their spears into pruning 
hooks, and there should be no wars forevermore. 

The Birthday of the Prince of Peace should be the begin¬ 
ning of a millennial calm among the nations. 

The way is plain to this supreme and glorious consum¬ 
mation. 

Five nations hold in their hands the possibility of universal 
peace. 

44 


r 


If the United States, with England, Germany, Russia and 
Japan, should join hands to make it, there would never more 
be wars in all the world. 

These nations, saving ours, have in their martial economics 
the supremest appeal for peace. Every kingdom is a camp, 
and every circumscribing sea is alive with ships. The stand¬ 
ing armies are colossal, and Dreadnought follows Dreadnought 
in frenzied competition on the seven seas. Starving treas¬ 
uries and peoples taxed to desperation maintain the gigantic 
engineries of slaughter, while industry and development lag 
at the heels of marching soldiery. 

The greater kingdoms are going bankrupt in the mainten¬ 
ance of fleets and armies to hold their pre-eminence and their 
equality in this martial century, and the people are cramped 
and thwarted in their uplifting struggle toward prosperity and 
intellectual growth. 

The great Republic has scant place among standing armies, 
and its fleet is not the first. This newspaper has fought for a 
mighty navy, so long as it was the spirit of the times to have 
one. If great navies are to represent the nations of the earth, 
we have held it essential and vital that our own should be the 
first, or equal to the first. But always our plea for battleships 
has been not for war, but as the wisest and mose effective 
agency for preserving and compelling peace. 

The “ American ” has always hoped and always planned 
for the era when fleets and armies should be permanently dis¬ 
banded, and the fierce disputes of nations should be settled in 
the arbitrament of disinterested states. We have believed that 
the time would come when navies and armies shall be no 
longer necessary, when nations disposed to fight shall be 
wholesomely restrained, and when the appeal to arms shall 
pass from the history of men. 

The “American” believes that this is the psychological 
moment in the history of the world to sound the appeal for 
Universal Peace. 


45 


»s 



There is not a nation in existence which does not fervently 
desire it and would not join in any great movement wisely pre¬ 
sented that gave promise of success. 

Why should not America take the initative in this Millennial 
Enterprise? The youngest of nations and the greatest, free 
from the jealousies and wrangles of European or Asiatic 
countries, sitting in splendid isolation and in splendid tran¬ 
quillity, the obligation of history and of opportunity is upon us 
to make the move. 

Let the heart and the brain of our great wise President re¬ 
volve the scheme under the noble inspiration of this Christ¬ 
mas time. Let the millionaires and the philosophers make 
ready their mighty purses and their potential pleas to give it 
sinews and acceptance among the thinkers and powers that 
rule the age. 

In the April “Independent,’’ Henry Granger, an American 
engineer, suggested that Theodore Roosvelt should be called 
home from Africa to lead this evangel among the five great 
nations of the world. 

The suggestion is full of power and force. The ex-Presi- 
dent is perhaps the most popular individual citizen of the 
world. More than any other single man would he find access 
and a kindly hearing with William of Germany, who needs 
most to be converted to this great idea. With the German 
Emperor in accord, Edward of England, the Emperor of 
Russia and the Mikado of Japan would doubtless fall willing 
into line, and the great work would be done. 

Add to Theodore Roosevelt other great men of our own 
and other countries—Andrew Carnegie and Congressman 
Bartholdt, the noblest names of England, of Germany, of 
Russia and Japan—and the spirit of this mightiest of proga- 
gandas would move the world. 

The navies of the five nations reduced to proportionate 
force might make the police patrol of all the seven seas. The 
other battleships might be contributed to the merchant marine 


46 




of each. The vast armies held in reserve might be disbanded, 
and the enormous revenue that holds them might be conse¬ 
crated to the development of great public enterprises and to 
the education of the children of the nations. 

The Hague Conference, enlarged and magnified and glori¬ 
fied, might become the arbiter of all national disputes. 

And the reign of peace would be established on the earth. 

The plan is neither visionary nor impractical. 

The very thought of it as a possibility is enough to in¬ 
flame the imagination, and that half ensures its achievement. 

The time is ripe for it, and it is in accord with the magni¬ 
ficent spirit of the advancing age. 

It is the most splendid and Christian impulse that ever 
stirred a Christmas season. 

Will President Taft rise to the greatness of the first stately 
step? 

Summon Roosevelt home and commission him to the illus¬ 
trious work. 

—From New York American, Dec. 23, 1909. 


47 




Who Shall Lead the World to the World s Desire 

As the old year of 1909 closes with the dream of Universal 
Peace, let the new year of 1910 be born with the aspiration 
renewed and emphasized in action. 

in the eager rush of the holidays the plan of uniting the 
five great nations with our own in a great peace pact to dis¬ 
band the standing armies of the world and police the seven 
seas with an international fleet found entrance to the heart 
and judgment, but the busy hands of philanthropy were too 
steeped in personal charities to take hold in deed. 

Now the old year goes, the holidays are spent, and the great 
nations facing the new year can write no higher and more 
glorious resolution than that wars shall be no more. 

The whole world is weary of standing armies, the burden 
of war taxes and the threat of blood. 

Europe spends $1,500,000,000 every year in keeping pre¬ 
pared for slaughter. A million and a half of men are kept in 
barracks who might be producing, or bettering the world. 
Three hundred millions of our own American money is dedi¬ 
cated annually to the prophecy of slaughter. 

Why cannot the world's desire find great men to lead it to 
glorious consummation? 

Seven great men at this stage of civilization have only to 
join hands to establish and perpetuate the peace of the world. 

Roosevelt and Taft, Edward of England and William of 
Germany, Nicholas of Russia, Fallieres of France and the 
Mikado of Japan have only to stand shoulder to shoulder, 
pledging their hearts and hands to this one incomparable vasl 
philanthropy, and the battle of the centuries is already won. 

48 


f 


Magnificent opportunity ! Majestic responsibility 1 

How can these great men fail to see and meet the immortal 
duty which the new year lays in their grasp? 

The President of the United States can bring these men 
together. This great land of Peace has a Peace President, 
whose fame is wholesome everywhere. He has a predecessor 
whose name rings magnetic and inspiring round the world. 
If President Taft would rejoice the world with a Peace 
Proclamation while the great year is young. If Theodore 
Roosevelt would come home to carry the evangel to his great 
fellows across the seas. If Andrew Carnegie, president of the 
Peace Society, would say that the capital of the country will 
be.pledged to furnish every dollar needed to finance the mighty 
enterprise, this sunlit new year of 1910 would mark the first 
stately step toward the realization of the world’s millenial hope. 

—From New York American, Dec. 25, 1909. 


49 


Articles of Federation 
for the Federated States of the World 

By OSCAR T. CROSBY 

Author of “Tibet and Turkestan” 

Is it visionary? Yes. 

All progress is made of visions which, slowly or suddenly, 
shape themselves, crystallize into realities. 

If the change be sudden we usually find that the magic 
wand which waved the shadows into substance was a sword. 
’Tis a pen that works the slower transformation. 

For years the federation of American colonies was a vision, 
seen only by “impractical” men. 

Unified Italy floated, iridescent in the clouds of thought, 
long before the material sun shone on Victor Emmanuel’s 
crown. 

The splendid fabric of the German Empire was woven in 
the dreams of millions of men ere a man of blood and iron 
declared that the great day of realization had come. 

Yes, it is visionary, now—this Constitution of the Federated 
States of the World. 

Once in all the western “world” of that day, when the 
spoken word in Rome was obeyed on the wild Danube and in 
Africa’s deserts, men breathed a universal peace, and were 
happy in it. But savagery dwelt on the borders, and tyranny 
ruled within. Destruction came; darkness and disorder fell 
upon Europe; yet the dream, which had been a reality, never 
vanished utterly from men’s minds. 

When France became a light unto European civilization, 
even the practical Henry of Navarre saw a vision of unity 
which vanished only as the assassin struck his life away. 


50 


Napoleon's great mind revived the mighty plan. 

Almost did his sword hew the plan into fixed form. To-day, 
it is Democracy’s dream. 

The vision is wider, too. Europe is no longer ‘‘the world.” 
Now we know that the Chinese Emperor, Eastern Asia’s 
“Elder Brother,” has been for ages and to millions of men as 
a sign of the dream come true. 

To-day Europe, Asia, Africa, America, discover a brother¬ 
hood that is bounded only by the unpeopled seas. 

From all lands an harmonious note is sounded. Only an 
undertone as yet, it is often drowned by the harsh cry of War, 
or it is stifled by the incoherent utterance of Prejudice and 
Ignorance. Yet the undertone persists. A little louder, a little 
sweeter, a little more dominant, it swells and gives character 
to the great tumultuous song of human life. Years must be 
added unto years, hopes unto hopes, labors unto labors, tears 
unto tears, ere the dream come true. 

Of all universal Peace Societies the Government of the 
United States should be the most effective. 

*********** 

The Resolutions which are now suggested to be passed by 
our Congress would give to the peace movement a platform, 
a rallying cry, a flag, an organization. 

There are members Quixotic enough, far-seeing enough, to 
insure the introduction of these or similar Resolutions. Sneers, 
praises, criticisms, would follow. 

It would then remain in our great Democracy, for men and 
women throughout the land, as citizens, as legislators, as 
judges, as members of a thousand societies, to speak their 
convictions on the high subject of International Peace. Con¬ 
gress, in the last analysis, utters the will of the people. If 
then the people adopt such Resolutions, they must soon 
become the official voice of a mighty nation offering its 
strength in the service of Peace. 

Although our country was once desolated by four years of 
dreadful war, which no pact of union could forfend, we yet 
bless the work of our fathers. 


51 


We know that the decree of peace and co-operation among 
thirteen separate States—even though that decree was once 
violated—has borne fruit of happiness a thousand-fold more 
valuable than were the sacrifices required for making our 
Union. 

So, would our children's children bless such work of peace 
as we to-day may do or plan, even though that work, in some 
great future strife, should show its human imperfections. 

Let us then try to give substance to the dream. Let us ask 

the vision to speak, not only of its object (that is in our 
hearts), but of its manner of being (that must be in our 
brains). 


Proposed Joint Resolutions of the Congress of the 
United States of America 

Whereas, means of communication now exist which give to 
the people of all nations a larger understanding of their com¬ 
mon interests than they could heretofore have had; and 

Whereas, such mutual understanding and its resultant sym¬ 
pathy between men of all countries does in fact provide the 
moral basis for a citizenship of the world; and 

Whereas, this universal citizenship requires an organ of ex¬ 
pression and of action to the end that it may bear proper fruit 
in preventing the desolations of war and in promoting human 
happiness through peaceful co-operation of states; 

Now, therefore, 

Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States in Congress assembled: 

That the treaty-making authority of this government be 
recommended to proceed promptly to the negotiation of inter¬ 
national agreements through which may be established a con¬ 
federation of the sovereign states entering into such agree¬ 
ments ; 

52 


I 


And be it further resolved, in pursuit of the great objects of 
this Resolution, that the Congress of the United States hereby 
give public expression to a form of Constitution, which in 
substance as below set forth it recommends to the states of the 
world as a fitting instrument for realizing world-wide aspira¬ 
tions toward the amelioration of harsh conditions now suf¬ 
fered by multitudes, and which, in part, are due to an ever¬ 
present fear of international war. 


Proposed Articles of Federation of the Federated 

States of the World 

Article I. The object of this Union is declared to be the 
abolition of war, and the furtherance of peaceful co-operation 
between the states signatory to this Constitution. 

Article II. The sovereign government created by the adop¬ 
tion of this Constitution shall be known as The Federated 
States of the World; its powers shall be those herein defined, 
and none others. 

Article III. Sec. i. For the exercise of all the powers 
herein granted, there shall be organized a body to be known 
as the International Court. It shall be composed of represen¬ 
tatives of the member-states of this Union. 

Sec. 2. The number of such representatives shall be de¬ 
termined as follows: 

From each of the following states: The United States of 
America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Russia, Italy, Spain, 
Austria-Hungary, Turkey, China, Japan, three members, plus 
such number as may be determined by the provisions of Sec¬ 
tion 5, this article. 

Sec. 3. From each of the following states and groups of 
states: Mexico, Brazil, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, the Ar¬ 
gentine Republic, Chili, Persia, Portugal; the groups of states, 
as follows: first group, Sweden and Norway; second group, 


53 


Servia, Roumania, Bulgaria; third group, Colombia, Panama, 
Venezuela, Bolivia; fourth group, Nicaragua, Honduras, 
Costa-Rica, Salvador, Guatemala, two members, plus such 
members as may be determined by the provisions of Section 5, 
this article. 

Sec, 4. From each of the following states and groups of 
states: Abyssinia, Switzerland, Greece, Siam, Afghanistan, 
Peru, group of Paraguay and Uruguay, one member plus such 
members as may be determined by the provisions of Section 5, 
this article. 

Sec. 5. From each state (except China) named in Section 
2, this article, one member for every ten million inhabitants 
in excess of thirty millions; from each state or group of states 
named in Section 3, this article, one member for every ten mil¬ 
lion inhabitants in excess of twenty millions; from each state 
named in Section 4, this article, one member for every ten mil¬ 
lion inhabitants in excess of ten millions; for China, one mem¬ 
ber for every fifty million inhabitants in excess of two hundred 
millions; provided that in the enumeration of inhabitants for 
the purposes of this article no account shall be taken of any 
persons held in slavery, or of inhabitants of colonies or protec¬ 
torates not self-governing. 

Sec. 6. The membership based upon population shall, dur¬ 
ing the first ten years of the exercise of this Constitution, be 
taken as follows: 

For the United States of America, six members. 

For Great Britain and its dependencies, two members. 

For Austria-Hungary, two members. 

bor the German Empire, three members. 

For the Russian Empire, seven members. 

For China, four members. 

For Japan, two members. 

For France, one member. 

At the end of the said period of ten years, and thereafter 
every tenth year, the Court shall inquire into and fix, for the 
purposes of representation in this Union, the populations of 
the member-states. 


54 


Article IP. Sec. i. The pay of members shall be thirty 
thousand dollars per annum. 

Sec. 2. The manner of selection, the personal qualifica¬ 
tions, and the term of office of members shall be such as may 
be determined by their respective governments. 

Article V. Sec. i. The first place of meeting of the Court 
shall be at The Hague, in Holland. This meeting shall take 
place, and the conditions of this Constitution shall become 
operative, one year from the date when all of the following 
named states may have adopted and signed these articles of 
union, viz., The United States of America, Great Britain, 
France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia. 

Sec. 2. During a period of five years after the first year of 
the exercise of this Constitution, the Court may sit in such cap¬ 
itals of member-states as it may select. During the same period 
of five years, the Court shall endeavor to obtain sole sovereignty 
of an area not exceeding ten miles square, and there fix its seat 
of government; and if it should not succeed in obtaining such 
sole sovereignty, the Court shall thereafter have its sittings 
wherever it may determine, provided, however, the persons 
of members of the Court shall always be inviolable when jour¬ 
neying to and from, or in attendance upon, sittings of the 
Court. 

Article VI. Sec. i. The rules of procedure of the Court 
shall be such as from time to time may be fixed by it, provided, 
however, that a majority vote of the members shall always be 
required for the following purposes, viz.: 

1. For adopting, or altering, rules of procedure. 

2. For rendering final decision in any dispute between 
member-states. 

3. For authorizing the use of violence by the armed forces 
of the Court. 

A. For determining the sums required for meeting the 
expenses of the operations of the Court. 

5. For electing a President and Vice-President (who shall 
be members) and for defining their powers and term of office. 


55 


6. For passing upon the credentials of members whose 
right to recognition as such may be in dispute. 

Sec. 2. Communication between the Court and the member- 
states shall be carried on by their respective executives, unless 
other officials be especially appointed thereto by the Court or 
the member-states. 

Sec. 3. The Court shall cause to be printed in French, with 
reasonable promptness, and to be furnished to the member 
states, full reports of its decisions, whether judicial or execu¬ 
tive, but its deliberations may be made public or not as the 
Court may decide. 

Article VII. The powers of the Court shall be as follows: 

Sec. 1. To decide by decree all disputes submitted to it by 
any state (whether a member or not) and arising between a 
member-state and any other state (whether a member or not). 
Such decision may be made upon the evidence presented by the 
state submitting the dispute, if, within such period as may be 
fixed by the Court, the other state or states concerned, having 
been admonished thereto by the Court, shall have failed to 
present other evidence. 

Sec. 2. To enforce by arms the execution of its decrees, 
the fulfilment of demands made in accordance with this Con¬ 
stitution, and the exercise of all powers granted herein. 

Sec. 3. To repel any attack, or to repress preparations 
therefor, by any state against any member-state. 

Sec. 4. To aid any member-state, upon request of such 
state, in the suppression of rebellion. 

Sec. 5. To establish, maintain, and control such civil 
organization and such armed force on land and sea as the 
Court may deem necessary. Conscription of the armed per¬ 
sonnel shall be effected, when necessary, through demand made 
upon the member-states, for numbers of men fixed in the ratio 
of the relative populations of the states. And for this pur¬ 
pose the population shall be determined in the manner speci¬ 
fied in Section 5, Article III. 

Sec. 6. To determine annually the sums required for 
meeting the expenses of the grovernment hereby constituted; 


56 


to demand of each member-state payment of its due propor¬ 
tion of said sums, the apportionment among the states to be 
made in the ratio which the number of representatives of each 
state may bear to the total number of members of the Court 
on the first day of July of the year for which the apportion¬ 
ment is made. 

Sec. 7. lo acquire and hold such lands, buildings, docks, 
anchorages, and rights of way as may be necessary for the 
efficient maintenance of its civil and military establishment. 
Such acquirement may be effected through purchase, gift, or 
demand made upon any member-state for the exercise by it of 
its right of eminent domain in respect to property desired and 
which can not otherwise be had on conditions satisfactory to 
the Court. 

Sec. 8. To demand of member-states that, with hi three 
months from the date when this Constitution shall become 
effective, they shall surrender to the control of the Court all 
armed vessels of war and all material appurtenant chereto; to 
select from such surrendered vessels and material whatever 
the Court may desire to retain in its naval establishment; to 
disarm the remaining vessels, and to return them, with mate¬ 
rial not desired, within six months from the date of their 
surrender; to demand of member-states that they shall not 
build armed vessels of war; to demand that, within one year 
from the date when this Constitution shall become effective, 
the standing armies of all member-states shall be reduced to a 
footing of one soldier for each thousand inhabitants, deter¬ 
mined according to the provisions of Section 5, Article III., 
and provided that land forces maintained solely for service in 
colonies not self-governing shall not be subject to the restric¬ 
tions of this article; to demand of each member-state such 
portion of its material for land forces as the Court may 
require; to value all vessels and material retained by the Court 
under the provisions of this article, and to pay for the same 
within ten years from the date of its acquirement; to demand 
the disarmament of fortifications fronting the land frontiers 
between member-states; to occupy, maintain, alter or disarm 


57 


sea-coast fortifications of member-states, and fortifications 
fronting the frontiers between member-states and other states. 

Sec. 9. To make terms of peace which shall be binding 
upon all member-states affected, in order to conclude any war 
waged between the forces of the Court and those of any state, 
provided that no war shall be terminated by a peace-treaty 
objectionable to any member-state so long as such state con¬ 
tinues to furnish to the Court men and material of war suffi¬ 
cient for the vigorous conduct of military operations. 

Sec. 10. To propose to states for their consideration 
methods of promoting the common good of mankind in litera¬ 
ture, science, art, and commerce. 

Sec. 11. To recognize any sovereign state that may here¬ 
after come into existence, and to fix the number of represen¬ 
tatives in the Court to which such state should be entitled as 
a member of this Union. 

Article VIII. An amendment to this constitution shall 
have full force and effect as a part of it when it shall have 
received the assent of three-fourths of the members of the 
Court and of two-thirds of the member-states, provided that 
for the purposes of this article each group of states named 
in Article III. shall be taken as one state, 



53 




A Constitution of the World 

ihe signatory nations to the following convention, desiring 
to form a union for the purpose of establishing justice and 
of securing for themselves as well as for posterity the bless¬ 
ings of permanent peace, do ordain the following Constitution: 

1. There shall assemble in the year 1915, and every fifth 
year thereafter, at The Hague, unless otherwise ordered by 
three-fourths of the signatory Powers, a General Assembly of 
the Nations. 

2. Each nation shall be entitled to be represented in this 
Assembly by not less than two or more than seven persons 
chosen by each nation in such manner and for such a term as 
may seem to it expedient. 

3. Each nation shall have one vote in the General Assem 
bly of the Nations. 

4. The territorial and political integrity of each nation 
represented in the Assembly shall be respected by all nations 
represented. 

5. No nation represented in the Assembly shall acquire 
exclusive commercial rights with any nation outside of this 
union, and there shall be no transfer of political control over 
territory included in the union without the sanction of the 
Assembly. 

6. Each nation shall treat all other nations on equal terms 
in matters of commerce, whether they be or be not represented 
in the General Assembly of the Nations; except that any 
nation can impose duties on the goods of any other nation 
equivalent to such other nation’s duties on its goods. 

7. While remaining in the Assembly, each nation shall 
have the right to arm itself and use its forces according to its 
own judgment, save as it may have agreed to resort to arbi¬ 
tration. But the armed forces of all the nations represented 

59 


/ 


in the Assembly shall be at the service of the Assembly for the 
enforcement of decrees rendered by the International Court 
at The Hague according to recognized principles of law and 
under the provisions of treaties of arbitration. 

8. The members of the Executive Council and of the Inter¬ 
parliamentary Union when designated by the respective par¬ 
liaments of the nations comprised in this union shall be an 
International House of Representatives, and it shall sit at 
least three months during each period of five years. 

9. Any general principles accepted by both this Interna¬ 
tional House of Representatives and by the Assembly shall 
become international law, unless vetoed within three years by 
one-fourth of the nations’ parliaments represented in this 
union. 

10. Any nation may withdraw from the union at its 
pleasure. 

—Reprint from The Independent. 


60 


Roosevelt—A Suggestion 

By HENRY G. GRANGER 

Member Am. Inst. Mining Engineers. 

Member Am. Soc. Engineering Contractors. 

All the countries of Europe, and even Japan, are increasing 
their military forces. China is undertaking to drill the great¬ 
est army of history. A few decades more and it seems that 
every man at work will carry on his back a soldier. 

We, England, Germany, France and Japan are tremendous¬ 
ly increasing our navies. As one adds a Dreadnought another 
adds two, and the others out-Dreadnought the Dreadnoughts 
with floating fortresses still more huge and consuming still 
more labor and cash. Spain and Russia, struggling in poverty, 
squeeze and build battleships. Italy, too, with woful internal 
problems, lets her people starve and launches cruisers. The 
more each does the more the others feel they must do—we, 
too, tho our revenues are down, must spend on our navy alone 
$i 18,000,ocx) per year with specific increases. 

What for? To organize expeditions to relieve congestion 
and conquer the wilderness, and replace the tracks of lions and 
rhinos with the footprints of happy, civilized children? Or to 
attack the problems presented by the laws of nature that ever 
beckon with hints of new and greater discoveries? No, none 
of this; just to be ready on an instant’s notice to kill people, 
to destroy the principal element whose constant increase under 
well-ordered conditions is the main factor of progress and 
prosperity. 

With the ever-increasing expenditure that produces nothing 
useful, what is the answer? What is the inevitable, inescap¬ 
able conclusion? 

They’ll all “go broke,” every country of them. 


61 


Colombia is one of the greatest sections of the globe in 
natural resources. It is a country whose men are brave, bril¬ 
liant and industrious, whose women are beautiful, betwitching 
and true. 

Less than a decade ago Colombia had, in proportion to its 
revenues, the greatest standing army on earth. No public 
employee could count on his salary, the interest was not paid 
on its debt save such parts as had specific revenues pledged. 
Schools were closed for lack of funds. Want and desperation 
were everywhere. The country was “broke.” 

Now things there have changed. Every one is paid on 
time and in full. Colombia’s credit is soaring. Three times 
as many schools as ever are open. Many night schools are 
educating the workers. Every mail brings word of a new 
railroad or other industry finished or begun. The national 
telegraph service is superior to ours. Peace and progress are 
showing their effects thruout the land. 

Why? 

Because in the crisis ensuing on the rape of the Isthmus, 
Rafael Reyes was given the reins of government. Himself a 
diplomat of the first order, and regarded even by his political 
opponents as, next to Diaz, Spanish-America’s greatest, keen¬ 
est statesman, he surrounded himself by such an economist as 
Calderon, such a thinker as Garces, such a man of iron as 
De Castro. 

Reyes discharged half of the army, and put the other half 
with mattock, pick and shovel, to building roads, repairing the 
telegraph, improving sanitation. He raised the pay of the 
soldiers; but he got results, and supported no parasites. 
Everything was permitted only as it added or promised to add 
to the country’s prosperity—and the results are showing in 
the devotion of a people to whom his severest threat is that 
of resignation, used only to carry difficult points—and always 
effective. 


62 


Theodore Roosevelt can see a point as quickly as any man. 
He is game to the core. If I did not know it before, I knew 
it on receipt of his instantaneous reply, that hangs before me 
as I write, to the letter I wrote him on February 16th ques¬ 
tioning some features of his last canal message. 

A big dose of salts under certain conditions is very good 
for the system, tho unpleasant while in action. Many of us 
who were compelled to mark time while financial conditions 
readjusted themselves are glad that Roosevelt is succeeded by 
a man no less able, but whose energy is curbed by judicial 
habit and diplomatic experience. But we recognize that the 
strenuous shaking that Roosevelt gave the country was for its 
great and everlasting good, and uprooted evils that, undis¬ 
turbed, would have led to destruction. We know that because 
of Roosevelt neither capital nor labor will ever rule the 
country. Silently accumulating dividends can never control , 
its destinies. Fair methods must prevail. 

Hunting excursions, authorship, lectures will soon pall on a 
man of his stupendous energy and ability. He has run too 
big a game ever to sit quietly for long and play hearts or old 
maid. It would kill him. Theodore Roosevelt left office the 
country’s idol—unquestionably the most popular man in the 
world to-day. With proper channels to work in no man in 
history ever had the chance to do the great good that it is now 
in Roosevelt’s power to do. 

For a score of wild horses hitched to a log to get anywhere., 
ft is necessary for them to stop, look and listen, and all pulk 
in the same direction. They’re all willing if shown how. It 
takes the guiding hand to get the result. It takes the strong 
trained driver—the man who, as occasion demands, can 
gently pat a shoulder and say “good old hoss,” or, if circum- : 
stances require, use his whip. 

The nations of the world all want enduring guarantee of 
peace, respect for their boundaries, a fair hearing and just 
decision on their claims. Every country wants to tear down 


63 


its accurst military and naval expenditure, but doesn t dare 
because the others won’t. 

If we could grease and tie up nine-tenths of our fleet, put 
nine-tenths of our sailors to work at harbor and river im¬ 
provement at proper pay, the sight of the flying dirt and the 
feeling of ‘‘doing something” would keep the men happy and 
content and glad to make their practice cruise in due turn. 
There would be no more sickening monotony of present peace 
service, prolific of desertions and imprisonment. The money 
spent would be at compound usury for the country’s pros¬ 
perity. Instead of advertising for recruits there would be a 
waiting list of eager applicants, as in the civil service and the 
canal force. 

With the armies and navies of the world reduced to simple 
police service, with assured safety, an era of wonderful and 
enduring progress and prosperity will immediately ensue. 

How can it be done? 

The dream of an International Congress, which now has its 
beginnings in the Hague conventions, can be made real, pres¬ 
ent and effective. America, England, France, Germany and 
Japan agreed to it, and the others must. This consolidation 
is out of Morgan’s line and beyond him. This world reform¬ 
ing consolidation can be effected. America and any two ensure 
the other two and thus the rest follow. Roosevelt has not 
only “the time, the money and the inclination” to do what he 
believes right, but in this case he has the energy, the prestige 
and the ability. 

If Roosevelt will tackle the proposition he can accomplish 
a greater feat than any other man ever had the opportunity 
to undertake, and the like of which, if he does it, no other 
man can ever have again. 

With the knowledge that Theodore Roosevelt is willing to 
dedicate himself to this, the greatest work of the ages, it 
would not appear difficult for President Taft to bring about, 
with the governments of the other leading powers mentioned, 

64 


i 


a conference of delegates. This conference would draw up a 
basis of international constitutional government to cover the 
questions of boundaries, arbitration, sanitation and police. 
The central government would control the navies of the world, 
except such vessels as are needed for customs coast guards 
in each country, and have entire direction of the forces of the 
nations, both naval and military for world police service. 

The basis drawn up at the conference would be submitted to 
the approval of each country, and then the congress would be 
elected under it, with Roosevelt the World President, and 
America’s delegation, including Andrew Carnegie and Con¬ 
gressman Bartholdt. Eternal peace would thus be assured, 
and in the midst of uninterrupted and uninterruptable pros¬ 
perity, and the development of commerce, shipping and all the 
vast natural resources that invite brains and energy to become 
great factors in civilization, the gruesome era of wars would 

become but a memorv. 

* 

, —Reprint from The Independent. 


65 


The Task of Mr. Roosevelt, 

An Editorial Reprint from ‘The Independent.'’—April 29, 1909 

i 

We are specially interested in the suggestion made by Mr. 
Henry G. Granger in our issue of last week that a great task, 
which no living man could attempt so hopefully, be undertaken 
by Mr. Roosevelt. It is one that need interfere with no other 
energy or engagement of his, but which might yet be the 
grandest monument of his energetic history. 

To Mr. Roosevelt while President of the United States was 
awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his labors as intermediary 
in the negotiations between Russia and Japan. That success¬ 
ful achievement would pale before such a success as Mr. 
Granger believes would be possible. He would have the 
United States ask Great Britain, France, Germany and Japan 
to join with it in compelling and ensuring the peace of the 
world thru the Hague Conference. As the chief Commission¬ 
er, assigned to the task of securing such an agreement of the 
five nations, the five strongest nations in the world, he would 
have Mr. Roosevelt named. His best energy and his immense 
prestige would find in this effort the noblest object to be 
achieved for civilization. 

We do not think such an attempt hopeless. The union of 
the nations at The Hague seemed impossible a dozen years 
ago. We are making as rapid progress in public sentiment 
toward the establishment of a Parliament of the Nations as 
we are in the suicidal enlargement of our navies and armies. 
W r hat with the latest scramble for Dreadnoughts, to be fol¬ 
lowed by a similar insane rivalry for war-fleets in the air, the 
financial ability even of the wealthiest nations approaches 
paralysis. The time is ripe for accomplishing the ultimate 
purpose of advocates of universal peaceful arbitration. There 


66 


is needed chiefly a leader who will have the splendid en¬ 
thusiasm, energy and faith which characterize Mr. Roosevelt. 

Think of the purpose in view, nothing less than the assured 
end of all wars. If the United States, Great Britain and 
either one of the three other great Powers could be persuaded 
to unite in this plan, the two others would be bound to follow, 
and then all the rest of the world. Then the expenditures, 
thousands of millions of dollars annually by the nations for 
destructive war and waste, would be immediately reduced to 
the minor needs of police service, and would be partly devoted 
to the expansion of internal improvements, roads, waterways, 
education, improvement of the condition of the people, and 
mainly remitted to relieve the grinding taxation. Then gov¬ 
ernment the world over might be for the benefit of the people, 
and not for the purposed injury of each other. There is no 
higher object that could be set before a statesman and a pas¬ 
sionate lover of mankind; and we know of no man who could 
better attempt this not hopeless task than Theodore Roosevelt. 
The very thought of it as a possibility is enough to inflame 
the imagination, and that half ensures its achievement. 


67 


I 


Permanent Peace the World’s Need 

@y HENRY G. GRANGER 

Peace, assured, permanent peace among all nations, is the 
recognized most urgent need of the world to-day. 

To insure peace the great nations have burdened themselves 
with huge and ever growing armaments, each necessary by 
reason of the other’s increasing fighting strength, until the 
situation has become supremely, ridiculously illogical and 
' economically intolerable. 

We waste annually $300,000,000 of our national revenues 
for guarding against imaginary wars. Europe wastes each 
year $1,500,000,000 for the same futile reason, and keeps 
under arms a million and a half of men, of their brightest 
and strongest. 

The economic loss to the world through the non-produc¬ 
tive occupation of Europe’s 1,500,000 men under arms at only 
a dollar a day wages for each man would mean the great 
yearly total of $450,000,000, in addition to the loss from use¬ 
ful channels of the labor of 5,000,000 men required to earn 
the billion and a half dollars annually wasted in war pre¬ 
parations ! 

The time has arrived to stop this terrific waste and to pre¬ 
clude the possibility of international bloodshed and insure the 
complete triumph of reason. 

Permanent peace and international disarmament have, per¬ 
force of economic circumstance, become the live topic of the 
day. Every nation wishes it. 

For some of the foremost, economic disaster is the inevit¬ 
able result of a slight prolongation of the present situation. 
For all, the present status is a curse. 


68 


If a conclave is called to decide on a basis of international 
government, in which conference all of the nations particpate, 
it will assuredly become the theatre for endless oratory and 
inextricable confusion of plans. 

To carry through an effective programme of'peace it must 
be done on a business basis. The working plan must be agreed 
upon by a caucus of the leaders. Whatever is agreed upon by 
America, the British Empire, Germany, France, Japan and 
Russia is sure to meet the requirements of the rest of the 
brotherhood of nations at the start. 

In all great movements the right men of the right minds 
are as important as the right measures. William R. Hearst’s 
world-wide publication of John Temple Graves’s Christmas 
Peace editorial has started, and the same publications with 
their millions of circulation continue, the greatest propaganda 
ever undertaken, in the most extensive modern medium of 
publicity. 

Theodore Roosevelt has already won the Nobel prize for 
peace work. No man excels him in good will for his fellow 
man. No man surpasses him in sincerity of purpose or height 
of ideals. No living man has had such fitting experience for 
the task. No man is better fitted in age and strength and ex¬ 
uberant energy for such a titanic task. Of Roosevelt as the 
man to carry through international peace Carnegie said, “He is 
the only individual likely to succeed, and I believe he could.” 

Theodore Roosevelt will not shirk the greatest task man 
ever had or ever can have again until the end of time. 

The skeleton of an international constitution can be drawn as 
the fruit of the acute legal minds of our great American law¬ 
yers. 

International courtesy alone would compel the few other 
leading nations to heed the official request of the President of 
the United States. With the greatest readiness will they re¬ 
spond to his call on the matter the satisfactory solution of 
which solves all their problems. 


69 


When William Howard Taft calls on Britain, Germany, 
France, Japan and Russia to name each six or ten delegates 
to join America in drawing up an international constitution 
to cover such international questions as sanitation, arbitration, 
boundaries, extradition, postal service and the establishment 
of The Hague Court with plenary powers, and, of course, an 
executive to enforce its decrees through the international police 
service that should have complete charge of all armament, ex¬ 
cept as required for customs coast guards—when President 
Taft issues this call the response will be immediate and fav¬ 
orable. 

Never has a President entered the White House better quali¬ 
fied for the great office. Never has a President had com¬ 
parable opportunity of achievement with that which beckons 
President Taft. 

—From New York American , Jan. 3, 1910. 


70 


The Proposed High Court of Nations 

By JAMES L. TRYON 
.Assistant Secretary of the American Peace Society 

An international court was one of the first ideas proposed 
in the practical program of the world peace movement. As 
early as 1840 the constitution and functions of such an insti¬ 
tution were worked out by William Ladd, the founder of the 
American Peace Society. This legal preventive of war was 
afterwards urged by the Peace Society and in later years was 
predicted by Edward Everett Hale as sure to be realized. But 
not till the first Hague Conference met in 1899 did an Inter¬ 
national Arbitration Court come into existence. The Perma¬ 
nent Court of Arbitration, as it is technically called, though 
popularly known as the Hague Court, settled the Pious Fund 
case, the Venezuela Preferential Payment case, the Japanese 
House-Tax case and the dispute between Great Britain and 
France over their treaty rights in Muscat, passed upon the 
Casablanca incident, adjusted the dispute between Norway 
and Sweden as to their maritime frontier, and has pending 
before it the fisheries dispute between the United States and 
Great Britain, and the Oronoco Steamship case between the 
United States and Venezuela. 

That the court has been a success on the whole is beyond 
question. * * * The fact that nearly a hundred arbitra¬ 

tion treaties, including twenty-four made by the United 
States, pledge most of the nations to refer certain classes of 
disputes to it, shows that it has won public confidence and 
has, to a large degree, become fixed in the life of the worid. 
But besides this court, which is actually in service, are two 
others, both of them projected by the second Hague Confer¬ 
ence, that may also go into operation when certain formalities 
are complied with or certain necessities arise. 


7! 


One of these is the International Prize Court, which is for 
the adjudication of cases of capture of neutral merchant ships 
and cargoes in time of war, a code for which was made at the 
Naval Conference held in London in 1909, but is not yet rati¬ 
fied by the nations that are parties to it. 

The other is the Court of Arbitral Justice, also called the 
Judicial Arbitration Court, which is for the same kind of 
cases that now go to the Permanent Court of Arbitration. 

It is the Court of Arbitral Justice, an institution that is 
known to but comparatively few American people, and that 
may easily be confused in the popular mind with the present 
Hague Court, to which I wish to call attention. 

But why, it may be asked, should we have a new court when 
we already have one that is successful and acceptable? The 
answer reveals the wonderfully rapid growth of the peace 
cause within the past decade, and is of special interest to law¬ 
yers because it is they who, coming to the aid of the move¬ 
ment, are responsible for the proposition. * * * 

The progress which has been made toward the court is due 
primarily to the efforts of three great American lawyers, ex- 
Secretary Root, Prof. James Brown Scott and Hon. Joseph 
H. Choate, especially the two first named. All who attended 
the opening session of the National Peace Congress in New 
York in 1907, which was organized for the purpose of bring¬ 
ing public sentiment to bear on the Hague Conference, will 
remember the profound impression made by Mr. Root’s ad¬ 
dress. In it occurred these significant passages, which may 
be taken as the foundation ideas of the proposed court: 

“In the general field of arbitration we are surely justified in 
hoping for a substantial advance, both as to scope and effec¬ 
tiveness. It has seemed to me that the great obstacle to the 
universal adoption of arbitration is not the unwillingness of 
civilized nations to submit their demands to the decision of an 
impartial tribunal: it is rather an apprehension that the tri¬ 
bunal selected will not be impartial.” 


72 


Mr. Root quoted in support of his position a despatch that 
Lord Salisbury sent to Sir Julian Pauncefote March 5, 1896, 
in which the difficulty of selecting impartial judges from a 
panel of arbitrators, on account of popular sympathy for one 
side or the other, is pointed out. 

“The feeling which Lord Salisbury so well expressed is, I 
think,” said Mr. Root, “the great stumbling-block in the way 
of arbitration. The essential fact which supports that feeling 
is, that arbitrators too often act diplomatically rather than 
judicially; they consider themselves as belonging to diplomacy 
rather than to jurisprudence; they measure their responsibility 
and their duty by the traditions, the sentiments and the sense 
of honorable obligation which have grown up in centuries of 
diplomatic intercourse, rather than by the traditions, the sen¬ 
timents and the sense of honorable obligation which char¬ 
acterize the judicial departments of civilized nations. Instead 
of the sense of responsibility for impartial judgment which 
weighs upon the judicial officers of every civilized country 
and is enforced by the honor and self-respect of every upright 
judge, an international arbitration is often regarded as an 
occasion for diplomatic adjustment. Granting that the diplo¬ 
mats who are engaged in an arbitration have the purest mo¬ 
tives, that they act in accordance with the policy they deem 
to be best tor the nations concerned in the controversy; assum¬ 
ing that they thrust aside entirely in their consideration any 
interests which their own countries may have in the contro¬ 
versy, or in securing the favor or averting the displeasure of 
the parties before them—nevertheless it remains that in such 
an arbitration the litigant nations find that questions of nolicy 
and not simple questions of fact and law, are submitted to 
alien determination, and an appreciable part of that sover¬ 
eignty which it is the function of every nation to exercise for 
itself in determining its own policy is transferred to the arbi¬ 
trators/’ 

Mr. Root illustrates his view by reference to the satisfactory 
settlement by arbitration of disputes among South American 
States, the arbitrators of which were detached from inter- 


73 


national politics and confined themselves to the merits of the 
questions before them, “as a trained and upright judge decides 
a case submitted to his court.” 

“What we need for the further development of arbitration,” 
added Mr. Root, “is the substitution of judicial action for dip¬ 
lomatic action, the substitution of judicial sense of responsi¬ 
bility for diplomatic sense of responsibility. We need for 
arbitration, not distinguished public men concerned in all the 
international questions of the day, but judges who will be 
interested only in the question appearing upon the record be¬ 
fore them. Plainly this end is to be attained by the establish¬ 
ment of a court of permanent judges who will have no other 
occupation and no other interest but the exercise of the judi¬ 
cial faculty under the sanction of that high sense of responsi¬ 
bility which has made the courts of justice in the civilized 
nations of the world the exponents of all that is best and 
noblest in modern civilization/’ 

Mr. Root was at this time Secretary of State and in a posi¬ 
tion to give his ideas effect. He therefore embodied them in 
his instructions to our delegates to the second Hague Confer¬ 
ence. His outline, which was calculated to put arbitration 
upon a judicial instead of a diplomatic basis, was elaborated 
by Prof. James Brown Scott, Solicitor for the Department 
of State, and Technical Delegate to The Hague. Professor 
Scott, whose name will always be associated with historic 
attempts to make a High Court of Nations, gave his whole 
soul to the proposed court at the time and has done his utmost 
ever since to have it made into a living agency of justice. His 
plan was brought before the Conference by Mr. Choate, who 
assisted him enthusiastically. It had the joint sponsorship 
of the United States. England and Germany. No less stren¬ 
uous a personage than Baron Marschall von Bieberstein, Ger¬ 
many’s first delegate, expressed the belief- that such a court 
would automatically attract to itself the disputes of nations 
for settlement. 


74 


I he agreement providing for the court contains thirty-five 
articles. The first article reads as follows: 

With a view to promoting the cause of arbitration, the 
conti acting powers agree to constitute, without altering the 
status of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, a Judicial Arbi¬ 
tration Court of free and easy access, composed of judges rep- 
senting the various juridical systems of the world, and capable 
of ensuring continuity in jurisprudence of arbitration.” 

The main features of the proposed court correspond with 
Mr. Roots idea of a court of law. 1 hey may be best appre¬ 
ciated in a comparison with the so-called Permanent Court of 
Arbitration, hirst of all, the proposed institution is a court, 
and not a panel. The number of its judges, though not given 
in the agreement, is expected to be fifteen, with deputies as 
alternates. * * * 

Next there is the essential characteristic of permanence. 
The court of 1899 * s styled “permanent,” but, as Professor 
Scott has pointed out, this is a misnomer. The panel is per¬ 
manent, but the tribunal is only temporary, as it is selected for 
every new case. I11 spite of the efforts of the United States 
to make it permanent, the court of 1899 was never intended by 
the powers to be so. * * * 

The members of the court of 1899 are appointed for a term 
of but six years, though their appointment is renewable. The 
judges of the proposed court would have a term of twelve 
years, which is also renewable. The judges of the court of 
1899 are paid only when they are on duty, which is when they 
have a case to try. The judges of the proposed court would 
be put on a salary of $2,400 a year from the time of their 
appointment, and receive about $40 a day, with traveling 
expenses additional, when they go into session. The draft 
of the agreement contemplates an annual session beginning the 
third Wednesday in June, provided public business requires 
it; besides the election annually of three of the members, with 
substitutes, as a permanent delegation in residence at The 


* 


75 


Hague and always ready to try minor cases or cases for sum¬ 
mary procedure. The delegation is a unique and promising 
feature of the proposed court. It makes the court free and 
easy of access, which is desirable, and is an advantage over 
the system of the court of 1899, whose tribunals have to be 
especially summoned, even for a minor case. It is given large 
power, but cannot perpetuate itself at the expense of the whole 
court, as it is not only subject to election by the general body, 
but may at any time, on application of the nations, be super¬ 
seded by it. The whole court may at any time be summoned 
in extraordinary session by the delegation. The delegation 
may act as a Commission of Inquiry, and, as such, may have 
associated with it nationals of the States parties to a case who, 
though not members of the court itself, may assist in its inves¬ 
tigations. This arrangement therefore supplies machinery for 
a permanent Commission of Inquiry, such as might take a case 
like the Dogger Bank incident, with the assistance of naval 
experts, or any case in which facts are in dispute, and report 
on its findings. The world has never yet had a permanent 
commission like this. Provision for it is potentially a great 
peace measure. 

One of the advantages in permanence is continuity of juris¬ 
prudence. It is believed that the system of long tenures of 
office and the provision for a delegation always on duty would 
tend to the creation of precedents that would ensure continuity 
of jurisprudence, which is one of the chief purposes of the 
court. Later its decisions might furnish material for a code 
of international law, an ideal that in the last generation was 
held up before the nations by David Dudley Field, and has 
since been supported by the Interparliamentary Union. 

The criticism made by Mr. Root that arbitral procedure 
has been diplomatic rather than judicial is met by the require¬ 
ments for the fitness of the arbitrators. Both the court of 
1899 an d the court proposed in 1907 contemplate the selection 
of members of high moral character and recognized compe¬ 
tency in international law, but the plan for the new court, un- 


76 


like that of the institution of 1899, insists that they shall have 
qualifications as judges according to the standards of their own 
country or have a reputation as jurists. Here is a safeguard 
against the choice of mere politicians or diplomatists to adju¬ 
dicate matters in which compromise, negotiation, and com¬ 
pliance with excited public sentiment are out of place, but in 
which only the application of the law to the merits of the case 
is in order, which was Mr. Root’s idea as expressed in his 
New York speech. The court, as already indicated, also con¬ 
templates the use of the prevailing systems of jurisprudence— 
Roman, Spanish and Anglo-American—which its practice is 
expected to harmonize. 

The proposed Judicial Arbitration Court, to be sure, if 
installed to-day, would not be open to all the nations, as is the 
present Hague Court, but only to the nations which accept 
it by entering into a special contract. These nations, how¬ 
ever, acting as a whole and not separately, are to pay the sala¬ 
ries of the judges, a method that is an improvement on the 
court of 1899, as under its system each litigant pays its own 
judges, a thing that would not be tolerated in a judicial court 
in municipal law. The costs of the proposed court, apart 
from the salaries of the officers, are apportioned among the 
litigants, who are also required to pay their own charges for 
counsel, witnesses, etc. No judge will be allowed to sit on a 
case in the decision of which he has already taken part in its 
earlier stages in national courts, nor can he appear before 
the court as counsel or advocate in any case, as men have done 
before the court of 1899* A judge is not permitted to receive 
money or hold any office under authority of one of the liti¬ 
gants, or of his own nation, inconsistent with his duties as a 
judge. In these respects, then, the new court is more truly 
judicial than the court of 1899, and, though limited to the 
contracting powers, is fundamentally more international in 

its spirit. 

Such are some of the superior features of the proposed 
Court of Arbitral Justice. It is not, however, intended to 


77 


supplant the court of 1899, but to be used instead of it if 
litigants prefer its services. It is stipulated that its members 
shall be taken, as far as possible, from the judges of the Per¬ 
manent Court of Arbitration. In common with that court it 
follows the procedure laid down in the Convention for the 
Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, except as it is 
empowered specifically to make its own rules. Its jurisdic¬ 
tion is as large as possible. It may take cases coming to it by 
a standing treaty of arbitration or by a special agreement. 

* * * As already pointed out, members of it may act as a 

Commission of Inquiry. They may also serve in the Inter¬ 
national Prize Court. With such large and varied possi¬ 
bilities the Court of Arbitral Justice ought, when established, 
to attract nearly all controversies between the nations. 

The projected court has the further advantage of being 
allowed to formulate the preliminary conditions of an intended 
arbitration, which is known as the compromis, unless that be 
specifically excluded from its power, or is otherwise provided 
for by treaty. This formulation may be made at the request 
of one of the parties when diplomacy has failed and the other 
party is reluctant to arbitrate. The power to make it corre¬ 
sponds somewhat to the forcible citation to court of one party 
by another in municipal law. This provision does not apply 
to the twenty-four treaties made between the United States 
and other powers, as the preliminary agreement under them 
must, in every case, be made by the President and the Senate. 
It is, however, especially applicable to disputes relating to 
contract debts, an agreement to arbitrate which may be made 
a dead letter by delaying the compromis. 

The court is supposed to sit at The Hague, but may sit 
elsewhere if obliged to do so. The delegation may, of its own 
accord, hold its sessions elsewhere with the consent of the 
parties, if circumstances make a change of place necessary. 
The court may call upon states to help it in serving notices 
and securing evidence. It determines the language that is to 
be used in cases coming before it. It discusses its cases and 


I 


makes decisions upon them in private session under the con¬ 
trol of a president or vice-president, but a judge who is 
appointed by one of the parties may not preside. A judge 
cannot serve as a member of the delegation "when the power 
which appointed him, or of which he is a national, is one of 
the parties (Art. 6). The decisions of the court must be 
made in writing by a majority of the judges present, who 
must give the reasons for their opinions and disclose their 
names. The judgment must be signed by the president and 
registrar. The court is authorized to improve upon its rules 
of procedure, but must communicate them to the contracting 
powers for approval. 

The draft of the new'' court was approved by the second 
Plague Conference, except as to the selection of judges, 
Switzerland alone reserving its vote, but the court itself has 
not come into operation. This fact may occasion surprise, 
but is easily understood when once the present condition of 
the doctrine of the equality of nations is explained. Theo¬ 
retically, and, for most purposes, practically, the sovereign 
states have equal rights in international law, but each is ten¬ 
acious of its rights, the smaller and the newer states being, if 
anything, more jealous of them than their larger neighbors. 
As Mr. Choate put it in his humorous way, in an address at 
the Harvard Union two or three years ago, Panama cannot 
see why she is not as important as England. But states as 
big as England take a different view of the matter; they 
believe that they should have special consideration, and are 
unwilling to trust their interests to judges appointed by the 
smaller states on equal terms with themselves. 

No plan within the political ingenuity of the Hague Con 
ference could determine satisfactorily how fifteen judges could 
be equitably apportioned among forty-six states. The rota¬ 
tion scheme adopted for the International Prize Court of 
fifteen judges, those of the greater powders, wdth correspond¬ 
ingly large maritime interests, eight in all, Germany, Austria- 
Hungary, United States, France, Great Britain, Italy, Japan 


79 


and Russia, sitting all the time, and those of the smaller 
powers, according to a classified list, some of the time, in a 
fixed period of years, though acceptable for the settlement of 
claims resulting from war, was not acceptable for the adjudi¬ 
cation of differences that might cause war. * * * 

The suggestion is made now, and bids fair to be accepted, 
that the difficulty be met by conferring the jurisdiction of the 
Court of Arbitral Justice upon the Prize Court. Mr. Knox, 
addressing the Pennsylvania Society of New York, in Decem¬ 
ber, said: “Very recently the State Department has proposed 
in a circular note to the powers that the Prize Court should 
also be invested with the jurisdiction and functions of a Court 
of Arbitral Justice. The United States as the originator of 
this project is confidently yet anxiously looking forward to 
its acceptance by the powers, which will give to the world an 
international judicial body to adjudge cases arising in peace 
as well as controversies incident to war.” This method of 
constituting the court, as Dr. George W. Kirchwey aptly 
pointed out in an address in Boston, is a conservative, a law¬ 
yer’s way of making progress, as it makes use of an already 
existing institution. The Conference left the matter to be 
adjusted by negotiation. When, therefore, a method of 
appointing the judges is agreed upon, the new High Court of 
Nations will get to work. That it may go into operation soon 
and become the recognized means of settling the disputes of 
nations judicially, as is fondly hoped by its distinguished legal 
advocates, should be the wish of every lawyer and of every 
friend of international peace. 

—Reprint from The Advocate of Peace, Jan,, 1910, 


80 


Paraphrase of Secretary Knox’s Circular to the 

Powers 

At the recent Hague Peace Conference, the delegates of 
Germany, France, Great Britain and the United States intro¬ 
duced a joint project for the establishment of an international 
prize court, to be composed of fifteen judges, eight of whom 
were to sit during the life of the convention, namely, six 
years, and to be chosen from the larger maritime countries— 
Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, Great Britain, Italy, 
Japan, Russia and the United States. The other judges were 
to be chosen from the remaining states to sit for a longer or 
shorter period, as determined by the maritime standing of 
their respective countries. 

After much discussion the project was adopted by the con¬ 
ference on October 18, 1907. The proposed court would be 
international because created by the nations as a whole, it 
would be permanent because its composition was determined, 
although not necessarily in session unless business was pre¬ 
sented to it; and it would safeguard the rights of neutral com¬ 
merce because the legality of the capture of neutral property 
by any nations at war would be finally determined by a court 
composed in a large majority of judges drawn from States not 
participating in the war. 

The law to be administered, in the absence of special con¬ 
vention, was to be the rules of international law, and in the 
absence of any recognized rule, in accordance with the general 
principles of equity and justice. The law was thus indefinite, 
but the Naval Conference at London (December 4, 1909-Feb- 
ruary 26, 1909) has supplied the court with a satisfactory and 
comprehensive code. 

The prize court was to be a court of appeal, either from the 
original national court in which the case was tried, or from the 
judgment of its appellate court. 

8? 


The United States has not submitted judgments of its courts 
to international tribunals, although it has very frequently pre¬ 
sented questions involved in its courts to mixed commissions, 
and has promptly paid the awards when the decision has taxed 
the United States with liability not found in its national court. 

Appeal from a court of the United States to the Inter¬ 
national Court might raise a delicate and difficult question of 
constitutional law and render difficult, if not impossible, the 
ratification of the prize court by the United States. 

The difficulty is one of form rather than substance, for 
whether the principle involved in the judgment be decided or 
the judgment of a national court be submitted, the result will 
be the same, namely, a decision upon the locality of the capture. 

Therefore, the Department of State has proposed, in a cir¬ 
cular note to the Secretary of State, dated October 18, 1909, 
that States confronted with constitutional objections in the 
matter of direct appeal from their national 1 courts may present, 
instead of the judgment of their national courts, the question 
involved in the capture giving rise to the controversy, and that 
the proceedings in such a case shall be in the nature of a re¬ 
trial de novo; and that the judgment of the International 
Prize Court shall in such cases be limited to the award of 
damages for the illegal capture. 

The acceptance of this proposal by the signatories to the 
convention would not violate its spirit, but would apparently 
remove the difficulties now standing in the way of the estab¬ 
lishment of the court. 

The Second Hague Peace Conference not merely adopted 
the Prize Court, but agreed upon the advisability of a court 
of arbitral justice, and adopted the thirty-five articles concern¬ 
ing the organization, jurisdiction and procedure of the Court 
of Arbitral Justice jointly proposed by the delegations of Ger¬ 
many, Great Britain and the United States. 

Therefore, acting upon the recommendation of the con¬ 
ference, and as originator of the project, the United States 


82 


has proposed in a circular note of the Secretary of State, dated 
October 18, 1909, and addressed to the signatories of the In¬ 
ternational Prize Court, that the Prize Court should be invested 
with the jurisdiction and functions of the Court of Arbitral 
Justice, and that when so sitting it should act in accordance 
with the draft convention for the establishment of a Court of 
Arbitral Justice, approved and recommended by the Second 
Hague Peace Conference on October 18, 1908. 

The advantage of investing the Prize Court with the func¬ 
tions of a Court of Arbitral Justice needs no argument, because 
it is obviously easier to utilize an existing body than to create 
a new institution, and as the judges of the Prize Court must 
necessarily be versed in international law, they could well be 
entrusted with any question susceptible of arbitration. 

The proposition has the very great advantage of providing 
the nations with a permanent court of arbitration for the 
peaceful settlement of controversies in times of peace; whereas 
the prize court as such presupposes a state of war, for without 
war the capture of property is illegal. 

The court would thus be in reality permanent, obviating the 
delay involved in the creation of a temporary tribunal and de¬ 
veloping international law by a series of carefully considered 
precedents by judges carefully chosen and acting under a sense 
of judicial responsibility. 

Arbitration would not merely be. as both Hague conferences 
have said, the most efficacious and most equitable methods of 
settling disputes which diplomacy has failed to adjust, but 
would be judicial in fact as well as in theory. 


Knox for Arbitral Court 

WASHINGTON, Jan. 5— Secretary Knox has addressed 
a circular note to the powers proposing that the jurisdiction 
of the International Prize Court, authorized in 1907 by Ihe 
Hague Peace Conference, be extended so as to make it a 
court of arbitral justice. This note was dated October 18, 
1909. No responses have been received. A statement ex¬ 
plaining the contents of the note and the reasons for the 
proposal was given out to-night by Secreary Knox.. 

The International Prize Court was to be composed of fifteen 
judges, eight of whom were to be chosen from the larger 
maritime countries, Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, 
Great Britain, Italy, Japan, and the United States, and were 
to serve six years. The other judges were to be chosen from 
the remaining nations. 

In his statement Secretary Knox says: 

The advantage of investing the Prize Court with the func¬ 
tions of a court of arbitral justice needs no argument, because 
it is obviously easier to utilize an existing body than to create 
a new institution, and as the Judges of the Prize Court must 
necessarily be versed in international law they could well be 
intrusted with any question susceptible of arbitration. The 
proposition has the very great advantage of providing the na¬ 
tions with a permanent court of arbitration for the peaceful 
settlement of controversies in times of peace; whereas, the 
Prize Court, as such, presupposes a state of war, for without 
war the capture of property is illegal. 

Utilizing the method of composition of the Prize Court by 
thus investing it with the jurisdiction and functions of a court 
of arbitral justice would constitute this latter tribunal, and the 
world would thus have for the States freely consenting to 
and accepting the proposition one international judiciary to 
adjudge cases arising in peace as well as controversies spring¬ 
ing from war. The court would thus be permanently consti- 

84 


tuted and would in reality be permanent, obviating the delay 
involved in the creation of a temporary tribunal, and developing 
international law by a series of carefully considered precedents 
by judges carefully chosen ana acting unaer a sense of 

judicial responsibility. Arbitration would not merely be, as 
both Hague Conferences have said, the most efficacious and 
most equitable method of settling disputes w r hich diplomacy 
has failed to adjust, but would be judicial in fact as well as in 
theory. 

Another suggestion was made to the powers in regard to 
the modification of the status of the prize court so as to 
hasten its formation. Secretary Knox proposed that nations 
confronted with constitutional objections in the matter of 
direct appeal from their national courts to the prize court, 
might present, instead of the judgment of their national 
courts, the question involved in the capture at issue, and that 
the proceedings in such a case should be in the nature of a 
retrial de novo , and that the judgment of the international 
prize court should be limited to the award of damages for the 
illegal capture. 

—From New York Times, Jan. 6, 1910. 


85 




An Arbitral Tribunal 

Regardless of the question of the slaughter of human beings 
and the misery of the families of the slain, war does not pay, 
and, therefore, should be abolished. If it ever is abolished, it 
will be from economic and not humanitarian causes. But 
whether we consider the miseries or the losses of war, it should 
be ended by the common consent of nations. There is but one 
way to end it, and that is by the establishment of a permanent 
arbitral court with power to effectually decide all international 
controversies. For years the people and the Government of 
the United States have favored the establishment of such a 
court. They favor it now. Secretary Knox, in behalf of our 
Government and people, has proposed to the powers signatory 
to The Hague convention that such a permanent court shall 
be created with real powers analogous to the powers of domes¬ 
tic courts. Great Britain, it is reported, has declined the pro¬ 
position, whether in principle or upon questions of detail, does 
not appear. 

Great Britain is probably the greatest obstacle to the sub¬ 
stitution of the decisions of courts for the decisions of arms, 
for the reason that she insists on maintaining a navy strong 
enough to destroy the combined navies of any other two pow¬ 
ers. So long as Great Britain holds to that policy, Germany 
will insist on ruining her people by maintaining the strongest 
army in the world, and also building a navy as nearly as pos¬ 
sible of the strength of the British navy. Germany has a 
population nearly 50 per cent, greater than that of the United 
Kingdom and more effective per unit. Therefore, in time 
Germany will have more money than Great Britain and can 
build more ships. But in addition to her navy, Germany main¬ 
tains a most powerful army, and the strain is becoming fear¬ 
ful. Realizing her numerical inferiority, Great Britain is 


86 


seeking to bring her self-governing colonies to the defense of 
the empire, and to the extent that she is succeeding, the people 
of these colonies are beginning to endure taxation from which 
they have hitherto been free. 

They had better all quit it—even Russia and Japan—and 
unite with this country and others in creating an arbitral court, 
disbanding their armies and stopping the inventing and build¬ 
ing of new engines of destruction. It is, of course, a matter 
of sentiment. But it is also a matter of sense. 

From San Francisco Chronicle } Feb. 24, 1910. 


But how much more satisfactory it would be to join with all 
powers in a simple treaty of arbitration for difficulties in¬ 
volving new territory, boundaries, markets, spheres of influ-' 
ence, commercial privileges, and the like, not already settled by 
act of purchase or conquest. Such an understanding would 
be worth more than single treaties. Would it not be a task 
worthy of America to lead in such an enterprise? And could 
Japan be in better business than to foster it? 

—From San Francisco Chronicle, Mar. 19 , 1910 . 


87 



Reply of France to the Knox Proposal 

Paris, March 2.—The French government has replied to 
Secretary Knox’s proposal to the Powers looking to the estab¬ 
lishment of a permanent international court of arbitral justice, 
accepting the proposition in principle, but making certain sug¬ 
gestions, which the French government believes will bring ail 
the other Powers into accord. 

Before replying to the note, the French government ob¬ 
tained opinions on the subject from M. Bourgeois, Baron 
d’Estournelles de Constant, and M. Renault, the French mem- 
, bers of the permanent Hague Tribunal. 

The exact nature of the French suggestions accompanying 
the reply has not been disclosed. 

—From N. V. Evening Post, March 2, 1910. 


The Peace Movement 

The Federation of the World 
By WALTER JOHN BARTNETT 

The world is in a transition period. Tribes and petty king¬ 
doms have slowly evolved into nations. Nations are begin¬ 
ning to recognize the brotherhood of man, the supremacy of 
right and justice and the duty of the strong toward the weak. 
The day of national conflicts and the barbarity of war is end¬ 
ing. The dawn of peace is approaching. This does not 
mean that there may be no further wars; it means merely that 
forces are now evolving that will finally put an end to war. 

By “federation of the world” is not meant the formation 
of one government that will supersede the existing gov¬ 
ernments. By this we mean that ultimately an agreement 
will be entered into by all great powers whereby will be 
formed a confederation represented by a congress of able 
delegates to which will be granted certain functions per¬ 
taining to the mutual benefit of the peoples of the several 
powers and to all the rest of the world, each nation other¬ 
wise maintaining strictly its own autonomy. 

The latest step in this direction has been the sending by 
Secretary of State, Philander C. Knox, of a circular note to 
the great powers, suggesting to them an agreement to estab¬ 
lish a court of arbitral justice. This is a great stride forward. 
It had been before suggested by the Peace Conference at The 
Hague in 1907 that there be established a prize court. Now 
it is proposed that this court be vested with the “jurisdiction 
and functions of an international court of arbitral justice. 1 ' 
This would mean that a tribunal would be established whose 
functions would be to settle all cases arising, in peace as well 
as those incident to war, among nations. The State Depart- 


89 


I 


ment expects that this note will be favorably received by the 
great powers. That it will have the assent of some of the 
nations, there is no doubt. 

The peace question is one of the most vital questions of the 
day. Preparedness for war is affecting as never before the 
finances of the great nations. The annual expenditures for 
navy and army purposes have been steadily increasing. Na¬ 
tional indebtedness has been expanding in an unprecedented 
manner. Even in times of peace the national expenditures 
for army and navy purposes have become a tremendous bur 
den on the peoples of all the great nations. At the present 
hour England is in the throes of a great parliamentary strug¬ 
gle. Tier constitution, unwritten though it be, is being put 
to the test. The very existence of the House of Lords is at 
issue. This condition of affairs has resulted from the budget, 
which imposes new and extraordinary forms of taxation. 
This is occasioned by the necessity of building new Dread¬ 
noughts and providing for the exorbitant and extraordinary 
naval and military requirements. It has been the policy of 
England to maintain the standard of her navy at a degree 
equal to that of any two great powers. To maintain this 
standard is taxing her to the extreme.. William T. Stead says 
that the expenditures of England for .1910 for naval purposes 
alone will exceed $200,000,000, and that if England maintains 
the two-power standard her expenditures must exceed $300,- 
000,000, for the reason that Germany purposes to expend on 
her navy in 1910 $160,000,000. 

Why this mad race for new battleships? It is because 
England is in dread of a great conflict with Germany, and 
Germany is preparing for a conflict with England. Germany 
is stirred to the core. Her shipyards are working day and 
night building battleships and torpedo-destroyers. The Ger¬ 
man people are groaning under the weight of the taxation for 
navy and army purposes. A great party in Germany is pro¬ 
testing against this policy of the Emperor. Some of the other 
nations of Europe are approaching bankruptcy to keep up 
this race of naval construction. Russia is building a new 


90 


navy, while millions of her people are suffering from want of 
food. Even Austria proposes to build a powerful fleet. 

Why all this ? Because of the lack of intelligent direction 
and the lack of confidence of one government in another. The 
English government is suspicious of the German Emperor. 
Fear has been communicated to the minds of the English 
people. They now distrust the German people, their own 
kinsmen. 

This can all be avoided. How ? By the governments ar¬ 
riving at an understanding. This understanding can be easily 
reached. How can this be done? We believe that it can 
best be effected by the appointment of Theodore Roosevelt 
as a delegate to The Hague, and by authorizing him as a Peace 
Commissioner to confer in an informal way with the rulers 
of Germany, England, France, Russia, and Japan on the sub¬ 
ject of disarmament and the proceedings to be taken to pro¬ 
mote the world’s peace, also the proceedings to be considered 
at the next Peace Conference at The Hague. This movement 
has already taken shape. Andrew Carnegie has taken an 
active interest in this cause and has openly proclaimed that it 
is the thing to do and expressed his determination to help. 
Money will be needed to achieve results, but the money will be 
forthcoming for this purpose. Mr. Ginn, the Boston pub¬ 
lisher, has recently made a donation of $1,000,000 to help the 
peace cause along. Money will be provided from other 
sources, and from the utterances he has made there is little 
doubt that Mr. Carnegie himself, will help.. William R. Hearst 
has lent the aid of his papers to this cause and throughout 
the United States the potent voice of public opinion has been 
stirred up by the able editorials written by John Temple 
Graves and published in all the Hearst papers. This senti¬ 
ment bids President Taft to act. Mr. Roosevelt should go 
to Europe as the representative of the American people, as a 
delegate of a friendly government not concerned in European 
politics. Mr. Roosevelt, when President, performed a great 
service for humanity in his timely intervention in the Russo- 
Japanese war, which won for him the Nobel Prize. He can 


91 


perform a greater service now by lending the weight oi his 
personality and by devoting his energy and ability to a move¬ 
ment which will have for its object the cessation of further 
construction of battleships and torpedo-destroyers, and which 
will ultimately result in the disarmament of the great powers 
and the organization of The Hague tribunal into a permanent 
court or institution that will render it unnecessary for the 
great nations of the world to exhaust themselves in the strug¬ 
gle to build and maintain great navies and keep millions of 
men constantly ready for war. President Taft, Congressman 
Bartholdt, Andrew Carnegie, Senator Cullom, Joseph H. 
Choate, Elihu Root, Philander C. Knox and George W. Wick- 
ersham can surely devise some plan whereby Mr. Roosevelt 
can be commissioned to undertake this great task. 

The peace of the world can be settled by^ Emperor William, 
•King Edward, the Czar of Russia, the President of France, 
the Emperor of Japan, and the President of the United States. 
There is no greater work for President Taft, Theodore Roose¬ 
velt, Andrew Carnegie and the others named than this. Theo¬ 
dore Roosevelt, if he will undertake this task, can bring about 
an understanding that will stop within twelve months the 
building of Dreadnoughts and the wasting of the substance of 
millions of men and women in useless and unwise expendi¬ 
tures, and that will ultimately save the lives of hundreds of 
thousands of men and put an end to much needless suffering 
and misery. 

—Reprint from New York Tribune, Feb. i, 1910. 


92 


The Cost of “Armed Peace” to the Nations 

of the World 

The Protest of Representative Tawney 

The House of Representatives considered the Army and 
the Fortification bills during the week just ended, and at 
every step of the proceedings Chairman Tawney of the Appro¬ 
priations Committee raised his voice in protest. Time and 
again he asked the managers of the measures when they 
thought the ever-swelling war budgets would reach their full 
size. How long, did they think, would the people of this 
country and of the rest of the civilized world continue to bend 
their backs to support the growing soldiers and sailors and 
their heavy machines of carnage? How long would the doc¬ 
trine of “armed peace” be tolerated in the councils of enlight¬ 
ened nations? To these questions he got no definite answer, 
for no man in or out of Congress can tell. 

“No nation in the world approaches our expenditures on 
account of wars past and wars to come,” said Representative 
Tawney in discussing for The New York Times the subject 
of Armed Peace. 

“In proportion to the size of our army and navy we are 
expending about ioo per cent, more than any other power in 
the world. Navies are built and maintained for national 
defense. They are not intended and cannot be justified upon 
the ground that they are necessary to satisfy an ambition, 
either personal or national, to compete with other nations in 
time of peace in size and number of fighting machines. 
In this country the prestige and power of the nation does not 
depend upon the size of our army or the size of our navy. 
There is no policy of our Government either foreign or domes¬ 
tic to enforce which the size of either is the first or only 


93 


essential. We have 90,000,000 of patriotic people. It is in 
them and their patriotism that the strength of the nation 
exists, and not in our standing army or our permanent naval 
establishment. In the future, as well as in the past, the 
strength of our policies and the ability of our Government to 
enforce them will be measured by ourselves and by foreign 
nations, not by the size of our army or our navy, but by the 
resources, the patriotism, and the loyalty of our people, who 
are known throughout the world to be ready and willing at any 
and all times to sacrifice their property, even their lives, in the 
defense of their Government and its beneficent institutions. 

'‘The total expenditures of the United States, Great Britain, 
Germany and France on account of their armies and navies 
is, in round numbers, ten hundred millions of dollars, or a 
billion of dollars a year. If you add to this colossal sum 
the tremendous war budgets of Japan, Russia, Austria, Italy, 
Spain and the other great powers of the world, all of whom 
are groaning under the weight of the gladiators they are 
carrying on their backs, you will have a grand total cost of 
armed peace so large that the human mind can scarcely com¬ 
prehend its magnitude. 

“Even though we are now appropriating 72 per cent, of our 
revenue for the wars past and the wars to come there is no 
hint of a stop in this programme, or even a pause. The war 
budgets of the world are increasing rapidly and enormously 
every year, and we are doing our best to keep up with the 
procession. If we do as well in this line during the next 
few years as we have since the war with Spain it will be only 
a question of time when the whole country will be working, 
not for the pursuit of happiness, not for the education of 
the rising generation and the support of the family, not for 
the upbuilding of the arts and sciences, but for the feeding, 
the arming, and the uniforming of the mightiest military estab¬ 
lishment the world has ever known. 

“Look at the showing of the figures. Immediately preced¬ 
ing the war with Spain the annual expenditure for the army 


Q4 


was $24,000,000. That was the yearly army budget for eight 
years preceding the Spanish war. For the eight years follow¬ 
ing that war the appropriation leaped to more than $83,000,- 
000 a year. This year we are asked to appropriate more 
than $95,000,000. 

“The increase in the sums appropriated for the navy for 
the same periods is about $600,000,000, a sum larger than the 
total expenditures of the Government for any year previous 
to the Spanish war, and large enough, our friends interested 
in waterway improvements tell us, to make the great Missis¬ 
sippi River and its tributaries navigable for thousands of miles 
and to carry out the entire scheme of deepening and broaden¬ 
ing of channels that the advocates are now attempting by 
convention and educational propaganda to enact into law. 

“Add the increase in the army appropriations to the increase 
in the navy appropriations during the eight-year period that 
I mention and you will have a total of $1,072,000,000, a sum 
exceeding by more than $158,000,000 the total interest-bearing 
debt of the United States. The sum total of the increase is 
even greater than the stupendous sum appropriated for all 
governmental purposes for the year 1910. 

“1 may be lacking in perception, but I confess that I can 
see no valid reason for engaging in this latter day ‘Dread¬ 
nought craze’ that has taken possession of the United States 
along with the other great powers of the world. We seem to 
be bent now on excelling all other nations in the size and 
number of big battleships that we are to build each year. If 
there is any reason to apprehend war with any foreign power 
within the next decade it has been carefully concealed from 
the legislative branch of the Government. We saw that we 
could spare sixteen of our great battleships from our coasts 
for practically a year. We might just as well spare them 
for ten. 

“Are we to entirely ignore our splendid geographical isola¬ 
tion ? Are we to entirely ignore the physical facts that make 
it practically impossible with the modern means of warfare 

95 


for any nation to invade our territory or come within range 
of our coast line without being intercepted by the means of 
defense we now have at our command? The transport ser¬ 
vice of no European nation is sufficient, even without oppo¬ 
sition, to land upon American soil an army of 100,000 men at 
a given time. There is no country in the Orient that has a 
naval base within reaching distance of our Pacific Coast, and 
no Oriental nation would be so reckless of its own interests 
as to risk the loss of its navy or its fleet by attempting to 
send it past the Hawaiian Islands for the purpose of attack¬ 
ing us upon the Pacific Coast. It would know what is plain 
to every mind, that without having a naval base between the 
object of its attack and its home ports, and without its ves¬ 
sels being able to stop somewhere to coal and repair they 
would never return. In times of war the ports of every 
country in the world are closed to the navies of the contending 
nations, and each of the combatants is driven to rely upon 
its own ports for supplies and for the means of carrying 
on naval warfare. , 

“Our splendid fleet of battleships that went round the world 
could not even start on its record-breaking voyage without the 
aid of at least twenty-eight auxiliary vessels flying foreign 
flags, and it was able to complete the great journey only with 
their assistance. Without the use of these foreign coalers 
and auxiliary ships of various kinds the trip would not have 
even been a first class fizzle—it would never have been begun. 

“Last year the United States spent nearly $30,000,000 more 
in its preparations for war than it has spent on all its public 
buildings throughout the country since the Government was 
established, exclusive of the public buildings in Washington 
itself. 

“If you will take the world’s figures of 1908, the last 
obtainable, you will find that my statement to the effect that 
proportionately we are spending more money for wars past 
and to come was made advisedly. We are spending only 
$35,000,000 less annually upon our army and navy than Ger- 


96 


many with an army twelve times as large as outs and a navy 
half again as large. Great Britain, with an army four times 
and a navy three times as big as ours spends only $66,000,000 
more each year; and France, with an army of 500,000 men 
and a navy of 56,000, does not spend as much annually upon 
them as we do by more than $150,000,000 in the course of 
the year. Taking the sum total of the figures of the cost of 
preparation for war and of wars past the United States is 
spending yearly $84,000,000 more than England, $136,000,000 
more than Germany, and $152,000,000 more than France. 

“In all civilized countries the use of arms in everyday life 
is discouraged and even prohibited. There is no more reason 
why the nation should go armed in time of peace than the 
individual. We do not allow the citizen to go about with 
revolvers in his pockets because of the danger that society 
would encounter in such moments of excitement as are likely 
to occur in ordinary daily experience. Just so there is a dan¬ 
ger that nations upon slight provocation or no provocation 
at all, will declare war upon each other when each knows itself 
to be dangerously armed and prepared for war. Instead of 
being a guaranty for peace, therefore, it seems to me that 
great armaments are a menace to tranquillity. There is no 
real reason for international war. The age was when it was 
thought possible for only one great nation to exist in the 
world at a time. Now we know that great nations are nec¬ 
essary to each other, and as long as geographical and climatic 
conditions remain as they are all of them can grow great side 
by side. In this era of national specialization we need the 
products of other countries to aid us in deriving all the com¬ 
forts and luxuries of life. To gain all there is out of inter¬ 
national life, just as in private life, peace is desirable. Inter¬ 
national commerce, international trade, international lan¬ 
guage, international art and literature, international political 
influence and example all demand that permanent peace be 
maintained, and none of them can flourish upon international 
war. But the selfishness handed down from barbaric ages, 
the distrust that has descended from the misty past, prevents. 


97 


“The world must decide in favor of peace without arms 
some time, however. If it does not it will be crushed by the 
very weight of the armies and the navies it is building. Some 
world-wide federation for the insurance of international peace 
must be substituted for the growing armies and sea powers. 
Just how this will be brought about I do not pretend to tell. 
It must come somehow, some time, to save the world from 
bankruptcy. Perhaps when the nations of the world awake 
to a realization of the fact that in the fattening armies and 
navies is found the cause of the lean larders—the increased 
cost of living—of the people they will take steps to turn their 
battleships into merchantmen and their cannon into steel rails/* 

—From New York Times, January 16 , 1910 . 


It Is Time to Protest 

> 

Secretary Meyer’s $18,000,000 battleship scheme is caus¬ 
ing the American people to think. It is the extensio ad infini¬ 
tum which may bring this nation to a realization of the folly 
of its militaristic policy. If we are to join in this game around 
the international table, is there to be no limit? Are the great 
nations of the earth to continue dumping millions on the table 
in the form of battleships and other military expenditures, 
each in turn raising the bet of his next neighbor, and taxing 
the people almost to the breaking point to provide the funds 
for this game of bluff? The American people are crying out 
against the burdens of the increased cost of living. It is prac¬ 
tically impossible for the head of the average American family 
to make both ends meet, and provide a decent living for his 
dependents. Women and children are forced to become 
bread-winners. This generation and that to come are being 
deprived of their right to enjoyment of life in order to secure 
a bare sustenance. No small part of this increased cost of 
living is due to the increase in the cost of government. Town 
and city government, state administration, national government 
are increasing charges on the people. Iniquitous tariff sched¬ 
ules are defended because more receipts must be secured. An 
unjust and insidious corporation tax is assessed because of 
“necessity.” The federal government seeks an amendment to 
the Constitution to secure the extraordinary powers of income 
taxation for federal purposes ,a resource never before essayed 
except in the emergency of war. The national administration 
recognizes the exigency of the times and talks of a commission 
to conceive economies in the cost of government. Conserva¬ 
tion of natural resources is restricted, needed improvements 
are denied, the better things of national life are scrimped and 
short rationed because of lack of funds. 

99 


i 

1 > 
■) ) ) 


And, facing this situation, an appeal is made to national 
pride to sustain the extension of our naval policy on an infinite 
scale. It might be termed the reductio ad absurdum, were it 
not that it is put forward with a plea for national defense, 
backed up by semi-official hints that rival nations are planning 
ships and laying keels along a similar policy, a plea that never 
has failed to appeal to the patriotic American people. But 
there are signs now that this appeal has been overworked. 
People are beginning to think. Each of these proposed 32,000- 
ton Dreadnoughts will cost $ 18 , 000 , 000 . Ihere is not a navy 
yard or a dock that will accommodate them. Millions must 
be spent in providing accommodations for them on either coast. 
Two Dreadnoughts will not make a navy, nor even a fleet. If 
there are to be two, there must be more. Two years ago as 
the result of the Japanese war scare Congress authorized two 
monster battleships, exceeding any ship then in the navy. The 
immediate consequence was that the necessity of a homo¬ 
geneous squadron was discovered and two more similar ships 
were authorized. The same principle applies and the two 
32,000-ton ships will need two if not four more to com¬ 
plete the squadron. By that time the game may have passed 
beyond the $18,000,000 stakes and in our turn we shall again 
be obliged to raise the bet, or retire from the play. In the 
Spanish war times we could build a battleship for $5,000,000. 
Already the first of the British Dreadnoughts has been rele¬ 
gated to the plaything class, as compared with the present-day 
monsters. With the 32,000-ton ship afloat, the 22,000-ton 
fighters of the world will be outclassed. At least sixteen ships 
of this type in the navies of the world will be fit chiefly for 
the junk heap. And there will have been set a pace for the 
naval game which will mean ruin for governments and peoples. 
It is time that the United States aroused itself to this unspeak¬ 
able folly. 

Congressman Tawney, of the House Committee on Appro¬ 
priations, gives warning that over 70 per cent, of the total rev¬ 
enue of the government is now being spent on account of past 
wars or in preparation for wars to come. In the last eight 


100 




years the appropriations for the navy were in the aggregate 
$600,000,000 in excess of the aggregate for the previous eight 
years. A similar comparison of army expenditures showed an 
increase of $472,000,000. Yet we are at peace with the world, 
professing a policy of international peace, pretending a desire 
to avoid foreign entanglements, seeking no conquests, proud 
of our diplomatic achievements in the mission of good will to 
all men. Why this inconsistency? 

The clergymen of Massachusetts to-day are forwarding to 
Washington a protest against these unnecessary military and 
naval expenditures. That protest should be followed by a 
similar expression of public opinion, through the press, in col¬ 
lective petitions and in individual remonstrances to members 
of Congress and Senators. This is not merely an academic 
peace movement, important and deserving as that may be. It 
is a protest of the people, crowded to the wall by the bare 
necessities of life, demanding that they be not required to bear 
extra burdens merely to maintain a national boast of naval 
supremacy. 

—From Boston Herald. March 2, 1910. 


10 ! 


1 





I 

Halting Naval Extravagance 

Chairman Tawney, of the House Committee on Appropria¬ 
tions, in promising to fight against the new $18,000,000 battle¬ 
ships pledges himself to a worthy cause. 

Including interest on public debt, pensions and other charges 
properly due to wars past or to war preparations, Mr. Taw¬ 
ney finds that 71 per cent, of the expenditures of the Govern¬ 
ment outside of the Post-Office Department is military. In a 
similar computation made only three years ago he placed the 
war expenditures of the Government at 65 per cent, of the 
total. The proportion of public money spent on war con¬ 
stantly rises. 

Mr. Allison, Chairman of the corresponding committee in 
the Senate, showed at about the same time that since 1883 the 
yearly cost of pensions had risen by $30,000,000; of the army 
by $51,000,000; of the navy by $84,000,000. To offset the 
higher cost of pensions there was an almost equivalent reduc¬ 
tion of $25,000,000 in interest charges on war debt. The great 
increase came wholly in war preparations, which are in their 
nature war provocatives. 

The naval appropriation for 1910 is more than double the 
naval expenditure in the year of the Spanish war. It is ten 
times as great as in 1886, five times as great as in 1896. If 
we begin turning 16,000-ton battleships into junk by building 
ships of 32,000 tons to cost $18,000,000 each, even the present 
vast expenditure will soon be doubled. 

From N. Y. World , Mar. 1, 1910. 


1 

i 

1 


102 


One Tenth of One Per Cent for Peace 

Congressman Tawney, Chairman of the House Committee 
on Appropriations, has shown that the annual cost of armed 
peace to the United States, which is a tranquil Nation, is 
$400,000,000. Past wars cost $160,000,000 a year in pensions, 
soldiers’ homes, and soldiers’ burials, while anticipated wars 
cost the huge balance of this total $400,000,000. Yet *he forty- 
six American States exist without preparation for war against 
each other—knit together by the common interests of inter 
course. 

In like manner commerce and intercourse are knitting 
together the nations. No government of them all, groaning 
under an excessive war budget, but considers seriously the 
project of disarmament. It has been proposed to the nations 
that they appropriate yearly toward casting off this terrible 
and useless burden one-tenth of 1 per cent, of what it costs 
them. 

Denmark has accepted the proposal. Great Britain, too, 
has resolved to pay from $100,000 to $250,000 toward it 
annually, in the discretion of its Chancellor of the Exchequer. 
France and Germany are considering, and with every pros¬ 
pect of adoption, this plan to appropriate a tithe of a hun¬ 
dredth of their war outlays in the interest of international 
commerce and peace. And during the present session of Con¬ 
gress the United States will be asked to contribute a like per¬ 
centage. The total yearly sum thus raised by the principal 
Powers should amount to $390,000. 

The nations support The Hague Court at the paltry annual 
cost of $2,500. Wh'at might they not accomplish with $390,- 
000, devoted each year to the cause of peace ? 

—From N. Y . Times, Feb. 23, 1910. 


103 


America Now Has Opportunity to Lead the 
World to Peace or War 

» f 

By JOHN TEMPLE GRAVES 

Washington, March 7.—There are thoughtful men at the 
Capital as in the metropolis who believe that the issues of the 
next decade hold for the world either universal peace or uni - 
versal war. 

Forces of tremendous moment are moving powerfully to¬ 
ward either possibility side by side. The white banner of peace 
and the red flag of carnage are struggling to the front of 
human interest as the arbiter of issues and of life to the 
nations. 

It is one or the other that must win. 

The dispatches from New York quote Jacob SchifF, capi¬ 
talist, conservative, peace enthusiast and financial friend of 
Japan, as saying on Saturday to the Republican Club that 
war with Japan was inevitable. 

Along the same wire comes the statement of Professor 
Blumentritt, the scientific expert and the intimate of the intel¬ 
lectual Filipino insurgents, seeking to align the Philippines 
and Japan in a war against the United States. Russia and 
Japan are joining hands to keep China as an inferior state, 
and England, never our sincere friend, is perhaps a party to the 
compact—all of them ready and willing to unite in eliminating 
America as a dangerous rival from the Pacific, and making to 
our country the “open door” a mockery. 

It is no longer possible to call the man who foresees the 
practical possibilities of war a “Jingo.” 

The situation in the East is full of menacing possibility. 
The New York American has thundered this warning since 
the peace party of Portsmouth made Japan the menace of 
the Pacific. 

The State Department in Washington makes a superb en¬ 
deavor to be optimistic, and expresses the hope that England 
has been misinformed and may yet be persuaded that her 
national and political loyalty is toward its American kin. 

104 


Neither supposition has a logical basis of possibility. Eng¬ 
land is never misinformed. Its diplomacy is as accurate as it 
is selfish, and it knows its ground. Neither can England be 
persuaded. England never allows its principles to interfere 
with its interests. And whenever England’s interests lie oppo¬ 
site to America, it will sacrifice America as remorselessly in the 
future as it has in the past. 

Perhaps a vigorous and astute diplomacy may extricate 
our country from the perilous conditions made by this new 
Dreibund of Trade in the Orient. 

But the safe course—the only wise and commonsense 
course—is for our country to prepare resolutely and vigorously 
to be ready to meet any condition that may arise. 

The navy and the merchant marine heretofore a bone of 
contention, becomes now a vital question of self protection and 
self preservation. There is no patriotic American who can 
forgive or forget the American statesman who in this hour of 
crisis stands obstructive in the path of “preparedness” which 
now becomes the path of safety and of patriotism. 

There is no half way ground for the American citizen of 
today. 

It is our policy made clear by our condition and our oppor¬ 
tunity, either to lead the world in an equipment and prepara¬ 
tion for war, or to lead the mighty movement of the nations 
toward universal peace. With us it is a clear question of battle¬ 
ships or a world congress of peace. 

We are equipped for primacy and usefulness in either field, 
and the chances of success are balanced either way we move. 

The boundless riches and the unparelleled resources of our 
great Republic offer us an opportunity for naval and mer¬ 
cantile development which is only limited and circumvented 
by the courage and intelligence of our statesmanship. 

The disinterested attitude of a mighty nation and its 
splendid isolation offer us equally an easy avenue to leadership 
in the great international movement, whose spirit was breathed 
into the New York American’s Christmas editorials in behalf 
of universal peace. 

This is a psychological moment in the world’s history. 
The nations are actually balanced everywhere between peace 
and war. The taxpayer is without exception for peace. The 
martial spirit of aggressive commerce is for war to attain 

105 


its ends. The balance will fall to peace or war as the publicist 
may awaken the people to the end that 

'‘The common sense of most shall hold the fretful realms 
in awe.” 

The pity of it and the danger are that it is always possible 

to arouse the world by rumors or threats of war. There is 
in all the universe no theme so noble and inspiring as universal 

peace. And yet its evangel scarcely quickens the pulse of the 
public or awakens a response from those who hold the theme 
in tender reverence. 

It is well to know in this time of ominous international 
menace that the machinery for universal peace is already 
majestic in scope and power. 

The United States of the world is a living fact not complete 
in its final, best working form, but it has well in hand the pro¬ 
cesses for development and for the fulfilment of its mission r 
which is peace and good will for all earth. 

This union of nations is built out of all human experience 
in government. It has its judiciary department in the per¬ 
manent international court now located at The Hague. It 
has its legislative department in the inter-parliamentary unions 
developed into the united national parliaments of the world, 
and it has its temporary acting executive, whose title is the 
peacemaker, as the result of a ballot taken by mail in 1904 
from an electoral college composed of the twenty-eight thou¬ 
sand intellectual leaders of the English-speaking world. 

It has its banner, and this is known and accepted by all 
the world. It is the flag of every nation within that nation 
in the broad field of white, and outside of every nation, the 
rainbow in a white field. It has its supporting fund in a pro¬ 
posed tax, which has been accepted by many of the nations, 
equal to one-tenth of one per cent of the amount annually 
expended in equipment and preparation for war. 

The idea of this fund and its use was unanimously approved 
by the Interparliamentary Union at their meeting in the Par¬ 
liament House of London in 1906, and this upon the motion 
of Richard Bartholdt, chairman of the Peace group, and 
representing the Congress of the United States. 

—From New York American, Mar. 8, 1910 . 


106 


The Madness of Aerial Warfare 

By THOMAS J. VIVIAN 

If an argument, either of the balance sheet or humanitarian 
sort, were needed to strengthen the great Christmas appeal 
of Mr. William Randolph Hearst to the nations of the world 
for universal peace, it is furnished by the latest example of 
the spirit of havoc on the part of three of those nations. 

These nations are England, Germany and France, and their 
offense lies in their deliberate plan to be the slaughtering 
Lords of the Air. 

It is no new thing, of course, that the offensive and defen¬ 
sive possibilities of aviation have been seriously considered by 
these and other Powers—ourselves included—but the graver 
aspects of the subject, the deliberate cold-bloodedness with 
which the sky navies are being assembled, the determined 
acceptance of the “inevitability” of aerial warfare, the amaz¬ 
ing fashion of conceding the possibility that this new arma¬ 
ment will supersede the existing forces—all these are phases 
of the question whose full significance may not be appreciated. 

The same frenetic, febrile rivalry that has resulted in the 
Anglo-German epidemic of Dreadnoughtitis is seen in the con¬ 
struction by both countries of dirigible war balloons. * * * 

Perhaps, after all, the most impressive feature of the whole 
strange, unhappy, depressing situation is the businesslike 
method with which the necessity of framing regulations for 
the coming Armageddon of the Air is discussed. 

Colonel Stone, of the English army, lecturing a few days 
ago before the Aeronautical Society, took up the matter of the 
bombardment of English towns by airships. 

/ 

He laid it down as an ordinary proposition that Portsmouth 
and Aldershot could be legitimately blown to pieces by aerial 
warships, the one being a dockyard and the other a camp, but 
not London, because it is an undefended town. And with a 


107 


shocking calmness he proposed, “as a distinct gain to civiliza¬ 
tion,” that at the next Hague conference there should be intro¬ 
duced the following article: “That no bombardment from 
aero-vessels shall be permitted against any place except for 
the purpose of destroying its defenses, defenders or war 
material.” 

About the same time, at a meeting of the Imperial Aero 
Club of Germany, crowded with savants and military chiefs, 
Professor A. Meyer, of Frankfort, offered laws for the neu¬ 
trality or belligerency of aerial limits, and declared that there 
ought to be no special code of honor for hostile aeronauts, and 
that scouts captured in the air should be shot as spies. 

A great Field Marshal of England, Lord Roberts, in a 
public speech declared that “people are brave and confident 
because they know nothing of what is going on (in the way 
of other nations preparing aerial fleets). If they only knew r ,” 
he said, “what is in store for them unless they wake up, they 
might be valorous, but they would not be so confident/’ 

And Major-General Baden-Powell, in another lecture, de¬ 
scribed, not as a novelist, but as a war expert, the coming 
combat in which soldiers will ride a slim pair of wings, in 
which monoplane and biplane will grapple above the tree tops, 
in which there will be terrible balloon duels, death by flying 
darts and the horrors of explosive kites. 

And what shall be said of governments that in the prepara¬ 
tion of these tremendous instruments of destruction calmly 
contemplate the contingency that with every advance they 
make in the destructive force of their new engines of war 
they correspondingly make their fleets and armies useless; and 
that, when they have succeeded in putting aloft squadrons 
of death-dealing machines against which the mightiest Dread¬ 
noughts of the sea will be powerless, it will mean that they 
themselves will have rendered useless an armament on which 
they have squandered such millions upon millions as would in 
the aggregate give comfort to all the poor of the world. 

—From New York American, Jan. n, 1910. 


108 


Comparisons: Education and War Preparation 

9 4 

The unwisdom of being ill-prepared for war is plain. 
Battleships are, as it were, the price of a bloodless war; for if 
we have enough of these we shall not pay the heavier tax 
which actual war extorts. The preparation is that tribute to 
Caesar which the great preacher of peace approved, paid to 
buy the quiet for going on in the paths of those higher things 
with which Caesar had no concern. War rises from those same 
selfishnesses in human nature which allow the waste of the 
national resources of every sort. Not by cutting off war shall 
the human family learn to be brothers. When brotherhood is 
learned war will cease. Meantime it is well to consider such 
an array of figures as was lately presented by Robert C. Root, 
peace commissioner, before the teachers’ institute at Los 
Angeles. Since experience has proved that it is the man back 
of the gun that counts, then the educational systems of a 
country are no mean part of the national defenses. The dis¬ 
crepancy between the expenditures for the higher and the 
lower means of defense is certainly very great. Mr. Root said: 

“To those who have eyes to see there is again a handwrit¬ 
ing on the wall which being interpreted reads, ‘Mars, god of 
war, is doomed.’ There are many signs pointing to the world's 
awakening. Men are losing faith in the old policies, they are 
learning that preparation for war does not bring peace.” He 
gave numerous statistics to show the waste in preparation for 
war. The battleship Oregon was built at a cost of over $6,- 
ooo.ooo. It is now out of commission as useless, having been 
in active service but n years. In contrast with this waste 
he stated that Harvard Lhiiversity, which had been in active 
service for 273 years, cost for construction to the present time 
between $5,000,000 and $6,000,000—less than the ship with a 
life of but 11 years. 


109 


At the recent Seattle Fair was exhibited a 13-inch gun the 
cost of construction of which was as much as many of our 
high schools. The cost of one shot from this gun is $1.000— 
equal to the annual salary of many of our high school teachers. 
He closed with the quotation from Burns: 

“It’s cornin’ yet for a’ that, 

That man to man, the world o’er, 

Shall brothers be for a’ that.” 

—From Christian Science Sentinel. 



no 


Words of President Taft 

At the recent Diamond Peace Jubilee of Methodist Episcopal 
Missions for Africa, President Taft uttered these impressive 
and significant words: 

“We are a great power in the world, and we may be, and I 
hope we are, a great power for usefulness, a great power for 
the spread of Christian civilization, and we must be so if we 
would justify our success and vindicate our right to enjoy the 
opportunities that God has given us in this fair, broad land of 
building of wealth and comfort and luxury and education and 
making ourselves what we like to think we are—the foremost 
people of the world. 

“There are those who would read the last words of Wash¬ 
ington in his farewell message as an indication that we ought 
to keep within the seas and not look beyond, but he was ad¬ 
dressing thirteen States that had much to do before they could 
make themselves a great nation, and that might well avoid en¬ 
tangling alliances, or any foreign interference or any foreign 
trouble, while they were making themselves a nation. But 
now we are a nation with tremendous power and tremendous 
wealth, and unless we use that for the benefit of our inter¬ 
national neighbors (and they are all neighbors of ours, for the 
world is very small), unless we use that power and that wealth 
we are failing to discharge the duties that we ought to feel as 
members of the international community.” 

The first President of the United States spoke more than a 
century ago, according to the wisdom of his age. The Presi¬ 
dent of to-day speaks in the broader light of an infinitely 
larger and more responsible time, interpreting rather than 
antagonizing the views of his immortal predecessor. 

The words of President Taft make the real inaugural of the 


III 


great peace movement which America is leading for the world. 

It lifts the nation above the limitations of the past and 
launches the United States upon a mighty mission of peace and 
good will to men. Neither the State Department nor the 
Executive feel anything but confidence as to the ultimate out¬ 
come of the overtures which have been sent from Washington 
to the nations. The spirit of the age is behind them; the spirit 
of all nations is beneath them, and the movement, once started 
from so illustrious a source, cannot be stayed. The President 
has sounded forth the peace bugles which must never know 
restraint. 

If the patriotism of the past has been builded upon the sen¬ 
timent “Our country as against every other country,” the 
larger patriotism of the future must say, “Our country as with 
every other country/’ with unabated devotion to our own great 
land; but, with a full recognition of the rights and happiness 
of our fellow man, we must, with loftier loyalty and more 
heroic effort, contribute such qualities of brain and soul to our 
country that it may lead the world in the nobility of its peo¬ 
ple, in its sense of universal justice and in its more majestic 
conceptions of government. 

Past patriotism has expressed itself in a wild race for power 
and in increasing armaments until 70 per cent, of the amount 
intrusted through taxation by the people to government has 
been spent in equipment for slaughter. It is our mission now 
to educate the world to that conception of world-patriotism 
which will save the colossal treasure to peace and to the bene¬ 
ficent children of peace. 

This is the spirit in which the White House and the depart¬ 
ments have assumed the initiative in the world’s peace move¬ 
ment. / 

This is the spirit in which the Press and the People should 
meet and sustain it. 

And with the Government, the Press and the People united 

112 


in this pacific and shining crusade, the time is inevitably and 
swiftly coming 

‘'When the war drum throbs no longer 
And all battle flags are furled. 

In the Parliament of Man, 

The federation of the world." 

John Temple Graves in the American. 


President Taft on National Honor 

From speech at banquet given by American Peace and Arbitration League, 

New York, March 22nd, 1910 

"T have noticed exceptions in our arbitration treaties, as to 
reference of questions of national honor to courts of arbitra¬ 
tion. Personally I do not see any more reason why matters of 
national honor should not be referred to a court of arbitration 
than matters of property or of national proprietorship. 

‘T know that is going further than most men are willing to 
go, but as among men we have to submit differences even if 
they involve honor, now, if we obey the law, to the court, or 
let them go undecided. It is true that our courts can enforce 
the law, and as between nations there is no court with a sheriff 
or a marshal that can enforce the law. But I do not see why 
questions of honor may not be submitted to a tribunal supposed 
to be composed of men of honor who understand questions of 
national honor, to abide their decision, as well as any other 
question of difference arising between nations . 0 


113 


Words of Cardinal Gibbons 


Baltimore, Jan. 15.— Cardinal Gibbons dictated the follow¬ 
ing statement for the New York American to-day concerning 
Secretary Knox's proposal for an International Peace Court: 

“Our distinguished Secretary of State deserves great credit 
for the efforts he is making in the cause of a pacific solution 
of international difficulties. 

“If the project succeeds he will deserve the thanks of the 
civilized world and will reflect great honor on the administra¬ 
tion of President Taft, as well as upon himself/’ 


Words of Hon. John W. Foster 

Popular feeling in the country will have to be greatly 
changed before there can be any substantial and permanent 
realization of the principles of the peace societies, in the 
opinion of John W. Foster, ex-Secretary of State, who sent a 
communication to the Peace Society of New York. Accord¬ 
ing to Mr. Foster, all the foreign wars in which the United 
States has been engaged were brought on by our own precipi¬ 
tate action and could have been avoided by the exercise of 
prudence and deliberation. 


Words of Senator Burton 

1 

“We have the confidence of the entire world,’’ said Senator 
Theodore E. Burton, of Ohio, before the Peace Society of 
New York, on January 15, 1910, “and it is our duty to take 
part in every arbitration and every movement having for its 
purpose the staying of the ravages of war.” 

The argument, he said, that nations have to maintain large 
standing armies in order to keep peace was mere fallacy. It 


114 


was almost as foolish, he said, as the argument that armies 
were required for the dissemination of Christianity. 

Senator Burton said the appropriation for maintaining the 
army and navy and other adjuncts of war in the United 
States was $135,000,000 in 1908, and a million greater last 
year. This was ten times as much as in 1880, greater than the 
total expenses of the Federal Government in 1878, and twice 
as much as that of 1861. 

“Two-thirds of all the expenditures of the Federal Govern¬ 
ment go for this purpose,” said the Senator, “and yet you ask 
are we a peaceful or a warlike nation. I have heard recently 
complaints regarding the high cost of living and many fan¬ 
tastic reasons for it. I don’t say that it is the principal reason, 
but certainly one of the main causes is the increased burden 
of Federal and local taxation. In a few months the question 
of building new battleships will come up. The present pro¬ 
gram should be cut in two. I believe in a navy that man for 
man and gun for gun is the best in the world, but I don’t 
believe in building warships so fast that we cannot get men to 
man them. Our triumphs of the past have been triumphs of 
peace rather than of war.” 


Words of Dr. Benjamin Ide Wheeler 

{Dr. Benjamin Ide Wheeler , president of the University of 
California, is an intimate friend of both Emperor William and 
former President Roosevelt. 

The economic wastefulness and general folly of war are 
forcing themselves everywhere to recognition. As the world 
is filling up we have all got to turn and conserve, not destroy. 
War is, furthermore, no tribunal to which reason or humanity 
can wish to be referred. Peace by arbitration cannot, how¬ 
ever, be secured without strength to enforce. The monstrous 
equipments of recent years move quite as much toward peace 


115 


as toward war. For the past thirty years there has been, for 
example, no national force making for peace more certainly 
than Germany. Her growing industrial interests assure a 
continuance for the future. 

The recent competitive equipments of the nations represent, 
however, in themselves, intolerable economic waste. The 
initial cost of a Dreadnought would endow a university in 
perpetuity. They also involve an evident absurdity. It is 
like three or more representatives of the same man bidding 
against each other at an auction. They all want, or ought to 
want, one and the same thing—peace; but they are trying to 
get it each for himself, and one at a time. 

What is needed is a syndicated power that will guarantee 
the order of the world and enforce the findings of an inter¬ 
national court. Our most definite present hope of finding it T 
however, would seem to be located at the bottom of our 
respective national purses. 

—From New York American, Feb. 18, 1910. 


Words of Dr. Mac Arthur 

Dr. Robert Stuart MacArthur, in his pulpit at Calvary Bap¬ 
tist Church (New York City), yesterday suggested that the 
United States should make Theodore Roosevelt a delegate-at- 
large to all the nations in the world for the bringing about of 
universal peace. In Dr. MacArthur’s opinion there was no 
position in which Colonel Roosevelt could accomplish more or 
better crown his life’s work than in being the principal factor 
in ushering in the day: 

“When the war drums beat no longer, 

And the battle flags are furled .” 

The remarks of Dr. MacArthur came at the close of an 
address by Professor Samuel L. Dutton on “Peace and War,” 
before the Current Events Class, which preceded the Sunday 
morning sermon. 

—From N. Y. American, Feb. 21, 1910. 


116 


Words of Hon. Richard Bartholdi 


Hon. Richard Bartholdt, member of Congress from Mis¬ 
souri, and head of the American Delegation to the several 
meetings of the Interparliamentary Union, delivered an address 
at the Lake Mohonk Conference on International Arbitration, 
at its meeting last May, in which he said: 

“If the President of the United States were to say to King 
Edward and Emperor William, ‘Let us keep the peace, and in 
case of any trouble between any two of our three countries, 
let us not draw the sword until we have had an investigation 
by an impartial third party, be it power, commission or court,’ 
if, I say, President Taft were to make a formal proposal of 
this nature and these two great monarchs were to grasp the 
outstretched hand, what would be the result? It would signify 
the end of war.” 


Wordsof Hon. Chas. W. Fairbanks 

The Hague tribunal is evidence of the fact that some head¬ 
way has been made toward the peaceful adjustment of in¬ 
ternational problems, but it is confessedly inadequate. It is 
a step in the right direction, but we may well ask, “When will 
the next be taken?” 

The United States and Great Britain have set a good ex¬ 
ample in settling disputes between them, and their past achieve¬ 
ments in arbitration must sooner or later have a profound 
influence upon other nations. All honor, too, to the United 
States, Great Britain, France and Germany for their efforts 
to supplement the work of the Hague conference by giving the 
principle of peaceful adjustment of international disputes there 
enunciated a larger practical effect. 

!J7 





Words of King Edward 

London, March i.—King Edward to-day made a plea for 
universal peace when he received the Archbishops of Canter¬ 
bury and York and members of the church convocations this 
afternoon. 

“The concord of Christiandom is unbroken,” he said, “and 
rarely in history has the idea of war seemed more repulsive 
or the desire for peace been more widely cherished throughout 
my empire.” 

The King’s words were considered of especial importance 
in view of the recent German war scare. 

From N. V. Journal, Mar. i, 1910. 



118 


Practical Steps to Secure International Peace 

By WALTER JOHN BARTNETT 

International arbitration must commend itself to all thinking 
people. Several wars have been prevented by it. But inter¬ 
national arbitration as advocated by some of the nations does 
not go far enough; questions of national honor are excluded 
from consideration. President Taft may be said to have 
advanced the cause of international peace by a declaration 
made in his address before The American Peace and Arbitra¬ 
tion League in New York on March 22 nd, 1910 . In that 
address he said: 

“I have noticed exceptions in our arbitration treaties, as to 
reference of questions of honor, of National honor, to courts 
of arbitration. Personally I do not see any more reason why 
matters of National honor should not be referred to a court of 
arbitration than matters of property or National proprietor¬ 
ship. 

“I know that is going further than most men are willing to 
go; but as among men we have to submit differences even if 
they involve honor, now, if we obey the law, to the court, or 
let them go undecided. It is true that our courts can enforce 
the law, and as between nations there is no court with a 
Sheriff or a Marshal that can enforce the law. But I do not 
see why questions of honor may not be submitted to a tribunal 
supposed to be composed of men of honor, who understand 
questions of National honor, to abide their decision, as well 
as any other question of difference arising between nations.” 

The conclusion to be drawn from this address is that Pres¬ 
ident Taft is of the opinion that all controversies between 
nations should be determined by a Supreme Court of Interna¬ 
tional Justice. 


119 


The history of the Hague Conference makes it clear that the 
nations cannot or at least will not disarm until provision is 
made for the determination by.a Supreme Court of Interna¬ 
tional Justice of all controversies that may arise between them. 

As it is costing the nations two thousand million dollars 
per annum to maintain their armies and navies, it is clear that 
the economic thing to do is to establish a tribunal such as 
the Hague Court with authority to settle all differences be¬ 
tween governments, and with power to enforce its decrees. 
It is estimated that the maintenance of such a court with an 
"-Nanny and navy sufficiently powerful to enforce its decrees 
would cost the nations approximately two hundred million 
dollars per annum. When such a court is established the 
governments can safely disarm. It should be the mission of 
the United States to lead the great Powers in the establish¬ 
ment of such a court. The first step would be to get the 
Powers to agree as to how the judges of such a court are to be 
chosen, and to agree to submit to such court all international 
controversies that may arise. 

A Joint Resolution will be introduced in Congress within 
a few days, authorizing the President to appoint a special 
commission of five members. The purpose of this commis¬ 
sion will be to urge on the nations the proposition above 
outlined. 

The United States expends annually six hundred and fifty 
million dollars to maintain the national government. One 
hundred and sixty million dollars per annum of this amount 
is expended in the payment of pensions, the result of past 
wars. Three hundred million dollars are annually expended 
for army and navy purposes. To maintain the Executive, 
Legislative and Judicial branches of the government requires 
an expenditure of only thirty million dollars per annum. 
Under the present policies the army and navy expenditures 
are increasing in a surprising manner. In the past eight 
years 1 they have increased by one billion, sixty-two million 
dollars over corresponding expenditures during the previous 


120 


eight years. If President Taft and Congress act and a peace 
commission is appointed and if this commission can induce 
the nations to constitute such a court (or, in other words, con¬ 
fer additional power on the Hague Tribunal) the ultimate 
result will be the saving to this government of at least two 
hundred and fifty million dollars per annum for military 
purposes. The monies now expended for superfluous army 
and navy purposes could then (if such a course seemed wise) 
be expended in river and harbor improvements, in irrigation 
and reclamation projects, in ship-subsidies and in other ways 
that would be for the upbuilding and prosperity of the people; 
or, if preferred, taxation could be reduced to the extent of 
these vast sums. However, the question as to the use of these 
funds so saved is but a secondary one and nowise concerns 

the question of international peace. 

—Reprint from N. V Evening Post . 


t 


12 ! 



Statue of Universal Peace 

It has been suggested that the Peace Movement would be 
furthered by the erection of a great statue of Universal Peace, 
in Paris, as the gift of the United States to the Republic of 
France. It is proposed that Congress appropriate a sum of 
money, say $2,500,000, or about one-quarter the cost of a mod¬ 
ern battleship, for this purpose. Paris has been called '‘the 
capital of Europe.” The location of the statue in that city 
would do much for the cause of peace. Such a statue could 
well be dedicated to all the nations. The expenditure of $2,- 
500,000 or even $5,000,000 for this purpose would undoubtedly 
receive the approval of the American people. 

If Congress acts upon this suggestion and an appropriation 
is made the sculptors of the world will be asked to formulate 
a fitting symbol for this great thought. Many concepts of it 
will be worked out. Here is one: Universal Peace may be 
represented as a great universal Mother, with a broken sword, 
a crown of olive branches and a wonderful illuminating light 
in her hand, leading the way. She should above all embody in 
every limb and in her attitude a great serenity as being a part 
of the Universe, which moves silently forward and upward. 
A transcendent glory should be expressed in her face, as well 
as power to command the elements. She should be represented 
as the Universal Mother of Nature and of Humanity. 

France gave the American people the Statue of Liberty. 
The United States symbolizes Liberty. Let us give to Europe 
the thought, embodied in bronze or marble, of Universal 
Peace,—a statue so firmly founded and well constructed as to 
stand throughout the centuries in Paris, the goal of travelers, 
and serve as a constant reminder and inspiration to the throngs 
of people of all nations who go thither. The Tomb of Napo¬ 
leon symbolizes military grandeur, the glory of a departing 


122 


age. The Statue of Universal Peace will symbolize the 
Brotherhood of Man, the triumph of the spiritual over the 
material,—the coming age. 

France and the United States, two Republics! May they 
clasp hands, and may the goodwill created through this gift 
spread to other lands, cementing all nations more closely 
together in respect, mutual understanding and friendship. 

—A suggestion by Hendrick Christian Andersen, Rome, 
Italy. 


123 


Position of the Christian Worker for Peace 


No! whatever theoretical Christianity may be, actual Chris¬ 
tianity must be left out of account. Yet assuredly, the Chris¬ 
tian Church, “de toutes confessions” ought to be a Peace 
society—opposed to all war as incompatible with its testi¬ 
mony, its character, and its very existence. 

It is interesting to note in this connection what one of the 
greatest warriors in history thought in regard to these themes. 
Napoleon I. was certainly a man whom vast experience had 
taught what kind of forces can really produce a lasting effect 
upon mankind, and under what conditions they may be ex¬ 
pected to do so. More than any of the world’s warriors— 
owing to the devotion he inspired, which is not yet wholly 
extinct—he had experience of the value of organised military 
forces, and of what the spirit of modern militarism, then in 
its infancy, could accomplish. On the rock of St. Helena the 
conqueror of civilised Europe had leisure to gather up the 
results of his unparalleled life, and to ascertain with an ac¬ 
curacy not often attainable by monarchs or conquerors, both 
the value of military supremacy and his own true place in 
history. 

When conversing, as was his habit, about the great men of 
the ancient world, and comparing himself with them, he 
turned, it is said, to Count Montholon with the enquiry, “Can 
you tell me who Jesus Christ was?” The question was de¬ 
clined, and Napoleon proceeded, “Well, then, I will tell you. 
Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and I myself have founded 
great empires, but upon what did these creations of our genius 
depend? Upon force. Jesus alone founded His empire upon 

love, and to this very day millions would die for Him.I 

think I understand something of human nature, and I tell you, 
all these were men, and I am a man; none else is like Him; 


124 



Jesus Christ was more than man. I have inspired multitudes 
with such an enthusiastic devotion that they would die for 

me.but to, dq this it was necessary that I should be 

visibly present with the electric influence of my looks, of my 
words, of my voice. When I saw men and spoke to them, I 

lighted up the flame of self-devotion in their hearts. 

Christ alone has succeeded in so raising the mind of matt 

towards the Unseen, that it becomes insensible to the barriers 

. .. % 

of time and space. Across a chasm of eighteen hundred years, 
Jesus Christ makes a demand which is beyond all others dif¬ 
ficult to satisfy. He asks for that which a philosopher may 
often seek in vain at the hands of his friends, or a father of 
his children, or a bride of her spouse, or a man of his brother. 
He asks for the human heart; He will have it entirely to 
Himself; He demands it unconditionally; and forthwith His 
demand is granted. Wonderful! In defiance of time and 
space, the soul of man, with all its powers and faculties, be¬ 
comes an annexation to the Empire of Christ. All who sin¬ 
cerely believe in Him experience that remarkable supernatural 
love towards Him. This phenomenon is unaccountable; it is 
altogether beyond the scope of man’s creative powers. Time, 
the great destroyer, is powerless to extinguish this sacred 
flame; time can neither exhaust its strength, nor put a limit to 
its range. This it is which strikes me most; I have often 
thought of it. This it is which proves to me quite convinc¬ 
ingly the divinity of Jesus Christ.” 

“ Here, surely,” adds Canon H. P. Liddon, “is the common- 
sense of humanity.” And this, I add, explains the position of 
the Christian worker for Peace, and his faith in its ultimate and 
universal triumph, when as the Hebrew poets foretold, nations 
shall beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into 
pruning-hooks, and shall not learn war any more. 

—From “International Tribunals,” by W. Evans Darby. 


> 


125 



Tiimtt nf IfcitgUm 

“Other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also must I 
bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one 
shepherd.” 

“Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” 

“Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth. Blessed are 
the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the peacemakers, 
for they shall be called the children of God.” 

“Ye have heard that it was said of old time, Thou shalt not kill; 
and whosoever shall kill, shall be in danger of the judgment. But I say 
unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to 
them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you and 
persecute you.” 

“All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye 
even so to them.” — Jesus. 

“From the cotton of compassion spin out the thread of love; make 
the knots of abstinence and truth; let your mind put on this thread.” 

—Nanak, a Teacher of the warrior Sikhs. 

“The ways unto God are as the number of the breaths of the sons 
of men.” —A Dervish saying. 

“However men approach Me, even so do I accept them, for the path 
men take from every side is Mine, O Partha.” 

—The Bhagavad-Gita. 

“Let him not be angry again with the angry man; being harshly 
addressed, let him speak softly.” — Manu. 

“Hatred ceases not by hatred at any time; hatred ceases by love. 
To the man that causelessly injures me, I will return the protection 
of my ungrudging love; the more evil comes from him, the more 
good shall flow from me.” — Buddha. 

“Harmlessness is the highest duty.” — The Mahabharata. 

“One God is hidden in all beings, all-pervading, the inmost Self of 
all.” —The Upanishads. 

“To those who are good, I am good; and to those who are not 
good, I am also good; and thus all get to be good.” — Lao-Tze. 

“Do not unto others that which thou wouldst not they should do 
unto you. — Confucius. 


126 


V 


“Men, therefore, should foster, not hatred, but love towards each 
other, which is the only means of enabling an Israelite (a spiritually- 
inclined person) to link himself to God. Man should not return evil 
for evil done him by others.’ 

“Man should always look upon himself as if the whole world 
is dependent upon him, and should ever be ready to sacrifice 
his body, soul and spirit for the good of humanity." 

“The rich and the poor should be united in helping and doing 
good toward each other.” 

“It is only by helping and upholding others that man can obtain 
life eternal and be united to the ‘Tree of Life.’ 

“Only the person who cultivates unselfish love for all mankind 
can attain to the ‘Palace of Love’ ” (the Buddhist Nirvana—the 
highest spiritual state attainable by our humanity). —The Zohar. 


“No man shall sit down to his own meals before seeing that all 
the animals dependent upon his care are provided for." 

“The beginning of the divine Law is loving-kindness and its end 
is loving-kindness.” 

“Let thy house be open wide as a refuge, and let the poor (of all 
creeds) be cordially received within thy walls.” 

“To love a fellow-creature as one’s self is the sum-total of the 

Law. —The Talmud. 

“Depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it.” 

—Ps. xxxiv., 14. f 

“Seek ye the Living One, all ye meek of the earth who have 
kept his ordinances; seek righteousness, seek meekness." 

—Zephaniah, ii., 3. 

“The stranger that sojourneth with you shall be unto you as 
the home-born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself.” 

Lev. xix., 34 . 


«i 


‘If thou meet thine enemy’s ox or his ass going astray, thou 
shalt surely bring it back to him again.” —Ex. xxiii., 4 . 

“If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat, and if he be 
thirsty, give him water to drink." —Prov. xxv., 21. 


127 


Uniuersal Pear?! 


O thou sweet mother—Universal Peace! 

Thou suckler of the young, thou strength of weak; 
Thou leveler of the proud, exalting meek; 

Thou clear-eyed Justice, servitude’s release,— 

O thou sublime, impartial mother Peace,— 

Born of the Ages, Wisdom-nurtured,—speak! 

Thou spouse of Brother-Love, on whose fair cheek 
The glories of approaching dawn increase. 

Yearn o’er us from thy empyrean pales, 

Thou, toward whose heart man’s holiest purpose soars, 
In whose sweet eyes the calm of Heav’n prevails; 
Whose wind-twined hair is tangled in the stars, 

And snow-pure draperies in unending sails,— 

Come, bend to us, O vanquisher of wars! 

HARRIET BARTNETT 


128 








‘President 

OSCAR T. CROSBY 

Honorary ‘Oice-'Presidents 
HON. RICHARD BARTHOLDT 
HON. GEO. E. ROBERTS 
SAMUEL HILL 

Vice-President 
HAMILTON HOLT 



urlii-Jteiteratum Slragu? 


ADVISORY BOARD 


T. O. Abbott 
R. Fleming Arnott 
Hon. Richard Bartho d 
W. J. Bartnett 
Paul T. Brady 
Herbert N. Casson 
Oscar T. Crosby 
Hon. Patrick Egan 
Henry G. Granger 
John Temple Graves 
W. S. Harvey 
Hamilton Holt 
Adolfo M. Jimenez 


Willis Fletcher Johnson 
Louis Lande 
Hon. Gustav Lindenthal 
Hon. Geo M. Nelson 
Hon. Josiah T. Newcomb 
Edward W. Parker 
W. C. Peyton 
B. S. Pray 
Richard H. Reed 
Hon. Geo. E. Roberts 
Charles T. Root 
Fred. F. Shedd 
Hon. Henry M. Teller 
F. Milton Willis 


Secretary 

F. MILTON WILLIS 

treasurer 
WM.C. PEYTON 


—, 1910 


The pamphlet herewith, 

'The Peace Movement--The Federation of the World," 

seta forth some recent contributions to this cause and some public 
comment upon the proposal concerning a Special Peace Commission, and 
particularly shows a strong belief, widely held, that Mr. Roosevelt 
should be actively enlisted in the work of establishing the basis of 
universal peace among the nations. It also contains a suggested 
Joint Resolution of Congress favoring world-union for the maintenance 
of peace, which has recently been introduced in Congress by Eon. 
Richard Bartholdt, but which will probably be modified to cover 
merely the appointment of the Special Peace Commission. 

It is hoped that your immediate attention will be given to the 
contents of this pamphlet, and that you will lend your aid in getting 
the Commission appointed. 

Sincerely yours, 

F. MILTON WILLIS, 

Secretary. 


Picas* address communications to the Secretam 


CARE OF NEW YORK PEACE SOCIETY 
S07 FIFTH AVE., NEW YORK 








t 






























































a, 








m 





























































V 


J* %, ° WWW * ^ : ; %/m w * o^v * 

t v * ^ v ^ • ^SMgt * <$> ^ oWM\y* <\y ^ 

'°"* ^ 1 .-.\* 3 '/ ,,, <, *'.W.<\ * 

* C ^ <-0- v* * ** aV c 0 N c ♦ 

* J ' , < 0 tgBfe;* v ,/ 

O o' * V o 


i/* 

•tt 

* ^ ^ 

XTa* ,0° <%> 

,*°v v v'i^/*> r ^ , 

Ck: < W V • &&' ^ 


/ ' w I 

c- 

« -£> 


^ ^ o' 

rv ^ * 



• x°°, 

•> ' <o 

-/> “ 8 i a * \y 

tv C* i v s s z 

aT> t- <3 5» fl -<> v v 

• * jnPO^A ^ <*„ .V, * 



^-v 0 >- ~4+ 

1 A * * \^ C ^*-. * 5 N 0 ° ^ ^ f 

V v\Ln^ > / » v ‘°a 

^ * .iAW/u * V> 

O v 

^vwvw n/// p> 7 v 

c ^ z 

3 -<» O 

^ *, * %■* \ ’ ^ v . * <y * ■-> 

V»i ^ 0#X a\ A * 

' — ** .** 

* 'Kp 4 ? * 

^ ^ K o 

~ i X°^ 1 

"a _ * 

* 'l ' (V C> • t, 

* o No - © 

a9~ » 1 * 0 , 

■%. a* .Wa’' 

v *• . $mM »• ^ ^ 

A V 'V ' ^Si^’ « »«, A 

<V '“° r ' , ~ > /* \ » 

o h s V'‘* s r t .* c 

.* 




’ > c. v ^ ^ v 

.'<;. V%V”‘>'% 

^ *>* v " s ,i C<5 *v 

- C> 0 X * <%¥m^ “ ^ K = JxX 

/ ^ 0o -<. *? 
»», , * s ,# 4 %/» , N „>" ,0- °o *• 

V V x s l^rw * ^ a0^ ^ Y * 0 a 

* •* ^ <r j % % . -AW 

^ a V ^ XJ - ^ ^ - 

IS <*^ y o ^ y + A ^ y ^ r ’7 s ' 

^ 1- <p ^ % ?} G o 

nX 



V 

p AX' " 
c/> » 

- i- z 


> «5 ^ o x 0 O * 

V V S \~> > ,0^ ^r, " 1 ' . \ V 

s \J f rt/l^> 1 -* 

* ^ v *- 

o Cr 

o^A Tj, J' 

VV" 'Ke 






© 

<■ rv^ o *- -<^ - * - - 

’*’/ *'••/% *"'* 

'«$ :$Ma\ V/ -‘jSfet 

4 


/ 

V 

► »f) 



z - •>* z 
r ^ *1 ^ilPf *» o 

^ r s> '* > *^* ° 

^ " O o 0° v*\?% ^ c« Nc « ^ ' 

<>b0 " ifm?* ^ ^ ^ < 

aO'' c b ^ ^ *•%' 










*> IWf. ■- 

* ^ .4 

J n . <\ 

>■ I) « x. \ ' 

^ ^ ,/ .' o c 

: ^ * :<v 

\°°<. 



>>• * 

& > s(j))w' i, -a 

y * * s S v i 8 ■* o * v 

^ °o o°Viw%^ 

* «\ x X\V 

O 


o \® C ^f. >• 


<*• 

CV *- , 

° • * a . -A * 

V N ■ s s 

<1- •*■ aT\ os /In *<• .v> **" 

’V. <o rv \ AS /,'>; o ~</> ,\V ., 

v* ^ « fMV/'i z </> '^y u 




* V> O 

x* 

0 N C A */- ' * * s ' ^ . , „ C y 0 * > 

0 ** -» 



$• 

* j • 

> .y v 

❖ o % y 

>*'\y s .., y/* o s.°” 

V v s l^rw * ^ a^ v ^ ' 

* <e- «* 

: % $ 


*+$* o 



y y ° 

., . s & *■ 

.<> a'' o N C * * * s , I D / l>a\*\ , ' N O ■V, 

% v y -V' °o o°' .'iiL*-» y ,# °r *,-v * * 




i°°* 






















